Proposal for a COUNCIL REGULATION on jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of matrimonial property regimes
Date: 2016-03-02
Institutions: Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers, European Commission
Subjects: civil law, economic system, enforcement of ruling, heritage protection, judicial cooperation in civil matters in the EU, jurisdiction, marriage, matrimonial law, private international law

EUROPEAN 
COMMISSION 

Brussels, 2.3.2016  
COM(2016) 106 final 

2016/0059 (CNS) 

Proposal for a 

COUNCIL REGULATION 

on jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in 
matters of matrimonial property regimes  

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 

1. 

BACKGROUND TO THE PROPOSAL 

1.1. 

General background 

Article 67(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union provides that the Union is to 
constitute  an  area  of  freedom,  security  and  justice  with  respect  for  fundamental  rights  and  the 
different legal systems and traditions of the Member States. Paragraph 4 of that article provides that 
the Union is to facilitate access to justice, in particular through the principle of mutual recognition 
of judicial and extrajudicial decisions in civil matters. Article 81 of the Treaty explicitly refers to 
measures  aimed  at  ensuring  'the  mutual  recognition  and  enforcement  between  Member  States  of 
judgments and of decisions in extrajudicial cases' and 'the compatibility of the rules applicable in 
the Member States concerning conflict of laws and of jurisdiction'. Many instruments have already 
been  adopted  on  this  basis,  in  particular  Regulation  (EC)  No 2201/2003  of  27  November  2003 
concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters 
and the matters of parental responsibility, repealing Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000. None of them, 
however, cover matrimonial property regimes. 

The  adoption  of  European  legislation  on  matrimonial  property  regimes  was  among  the  priorities 
identified in the 1998 Vienna Action Plan. The programme on mutual recognition of decisions in 
civil  and  commercial  matters  adopted  by  the  Council  on  30 November  20001  provided  for  the 
drafting  of  an  instrument  on  jurisdiction  and  the  recognition  and  enforcement  of  decisions  as 
regards 'rights in property arising out of a matrimonial relationship and the property consequences 
of  the  separation  of  an  unmarried  couple'.  The  Hague  programme2,  which  was  adopted  by  the 
European  Council  on  4  and  5  November  2004,  set  the  implementation  of  the  mutual  recognition 
programme as a top priority and called on the Commission to submit a Green Paper on 'the conflict 
of laws in matters concerning matrimonial property regimes, including the question of jurisdiction 
and mutual recognition', and stressed the need to adopt legislation by 2011. 

The Stockholm Programme, which was adopted by the European Council on 11 December 2009, 
also  states  that  mutual  recognition  must  be  extended  to  matrimonial  property  regimes  and  the 
property consequences of the separation of unmarried couples. 

In the 'EU Citizenship Report 2010: Dismantling the obstacles to EU citizens’ rights', adopted on 
27  October  20103,  the  Commission  identified  uncertainty  surrounding  the  property  rights  of 
international couples  as  one  of  the  main obstacles faced by  EU  citizens  in  their daily  lives when 
they tried to exercise the rights the EU conferred on them across national borders. To remedy this, 
it  announced  that  it  would  adopt  in  2011  a  proposal  for  legislation  to  make  it  easier  for 
international couples (either married or registered partners) to know which courts had jurisdiction 
to deal with their property rights and which law applied to their property rights. 

On 16 March 2011, the Commission adopted a proposal4 for a Council Regulation on jurisdiction, 
applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of matrimonial property 
regimes  and  a  proposal5  for  a  Council  Regulation  on  jurisdiction,  applicable  law  and  the 

1 
2 
3 
4 
5 

OJ L 12, 15.1.2001, p. 1. 
OJ L 53, 3.3.2005, p. 1. 
COM (2010) 603. 
COM (2011) 126. 
COM (2011) 127. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

                                                 
recognition  and  enforcement  of  decisions  regarding  the  property  consequences  of  registered 
partnerships6.  

The  legal  basis  for  the  proposed  Council  Regulations  was  Article  81(3)  of  the  Treaty  on  the 
Functioning of the European Union. The proposals related to judicial cooperation in civil matters 
covering  ‘aspects  relating  to  family  law’.  Under  this  legal  basis  measures  are  adopted  by  the 
Council  acting  unanimously  after  consulting  the  European  Parliament.  The  European  Parliament 
delivered its opinion on 10 September 20137. 

The  Commission  proposals  were  discussed  in  the  Council  Working  Party  on  Civil  Law  Matters 
(Matrimonial property regimes and the property consequences of registered partnerships) until the 
end of 2014. In December 2014, the Council decided to grant a reflection period to those Member 
States  which  continued  to  have  difficulties;  this  period  should  not  last,  however,  more  than  one 
year.  At  its  meeting  of  3  December  2015,  the  Council  concluded  that  no  unanimity  could  be 
reached for the adoption of the proposals for regulations on matrimonial property regimes and the 
property consequences of registered partnerships and that therefore the objectives of cooperation in 
this area could not  be  attained within a reasonable  period  by  the  Union as a whole. The Council 
also  noted  that  several  Member  States  expressed  their  readiness  to  give  positive  consideration  to 
the establishment of enhanced cooperation on the matters covered by the proposals. 

From December 2015 to February 2016, 17 Member States8 addressed a request to the Commission 
indicating that they wished to establish enhanced cooperation between themselves in the area of the 
property regimes of international couples and, specifically, of jurisdiction, applicable law and the 
recognition  and  enforcement  of  decisions  in  matters  of  matrimonial  property  regimes  and 
jurisdiction,  applicable  law  and  the  recognition  and  enforcement  of  decisions  regarding  the 
property consequences of registered partnerships, and asking the Commission to submit a proposal 
to the Council to that effect. 

The proposal for a Council Decision authorising enhanced cooperation in the area of jurisdiction, 
applicable  law  and  the  recognition  and  enforcement  of  decisions  on  the  property  regimes  of 
international  couples,  covering  both  matters  of  matrimonial  property  regimes  and  the  property 
consequences  of  registered  partnerships;  this  proposal  for  a  Council  Regulation  on  matrimonial 
property regimes and the parallel proposal for a Council Regulation on the property consequences 
of registered partnerships, both of which implement the enhanced cooperation and were adopted by 
the  Commission  at  the  same  time,  are  the  Commission's  response  to  the  request  by  17  Member 
States  (hereinafter  referred  to  as  'the  participating  Member  States').  The  proposal  for  a  Council 
Decision contains a detailed assessment of the legal conditions governing, and the appropriateness 
of,  the  introduction  of  enhanced  cooperation  in  the  area  of  jurisdiction,  applicable  law  and  the 
recognition  and  enforcement  of  decisions  on  the  property  regimes  of  international  couples, 
covering both matters of matrimonial property regimes and the property consequences of registered 
partnerships. 

6 

7 
8 

In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol on the position of Denmark annexed to the Treaties, Denmark 
did  not  take  part  in  the  adoption  of  the  proposed  Regulation  and  was  not  bound  by  it  or  subject  to  its 
application. In accordance with Article 1 and 2 of Protocol on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland 
annexed to the Treaties, Ireland and the United Kingdom did not give notice of their wish to take part in the 
adoption and application of the proposed Regulation.  
A7-0253/2013. 
Sweden,  Belgium,  Greece,  Croatia,  Slovenia,  Spain,  France,  Portugal,  Italy,  Malta,  Luxembourg,  Germany, 
the Czech Republic, the Netherlands, Austria, Bulgaria and Finland. 

EN 

3 

   EN 

                                                 
1.2. 

Grounds for and objectives of the proposal 

The increasing mobility of persons within an area without internal frontiers leads to a significant 
increase  in  the  number  of  couples  formed  by  nationals  of  different  Member  States  who  live  in  a 
Member State other than their own or acquire property in more than one Member State. A study 
carried  out  by  the  consortium  ASSER-UCL  in  20039  showed  the  large  number  of  transnational 
couples within the Union and the practical and legal difficulties such couples face, both in the daily 
management of their property and in its division if the couple separate or one of its members dies. 
These difficulties often result from the great disparities between the applicable rules governing the 
property effects of marriage, both in substantive law and in private international law.  

Because of the distinctive features of  marriage and registered partnerships and the different legal 
consequences  of  these  forms  of  union,  the  Commission  is  presenting  two  separate  proposals  for 
Regulations: one on jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions 
in  matters  of  matrimonial  property  regimes,  and  the  other  on  jurisdiction,  applicable  law  and  the 
recognition  and  enforcement  of  decisions  in  matters  of  the  property  consequences  of  registered 
partnerships.  These  two  proposals  are  the  implementing  measures  of  the  enhanced  cooperation 
established  in  the  area  of  jurisdiction,  applicable  law  and  the  recognition  and  enforcement  of 
decisions  on  the  property  regimes  of  international  couples,  covering  both  matters  of  matrimonial 
property regimes and the property consequences of registered partnerships.   

The  purpose  of  this  proposal  is  to  establish  a  clear  legal  framework  in  the  European  Union  for 
determining  jurisdiction  and  the  law  applicable  to  matrimonial  property  regimes  and  to  facilitate 
the circulation of decisions and instruments on this matter among Member States. 

2. 

RESULT OF THE CONSULTATIONS – IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

Before the 2011 Commission proposal was drawn up, a broad consultation exercise took place with 
the  Member  States,  other  Union  institutions  and  the  public.  Following  the  2003  study,  on 
17 July 2006  the Commission published a Green Paper on conflict  of laws in matters concerning 
matrimonial property regimes, including the question of jurisdiction and mutual recognition10, and 
launched wide-ranging consultations on the subject. A group of experts, PRM/III, was set up by the 
Commission to draw up the proposal. The group was composed of experts representing the range of 
professions concerned and the different European legal traditions; it met five times between 2008 
and  2010.  The  Commission  also  held  a  public  hearing  on  28 September  2009  involving  some 
hundred  participants.  The  debates  confirmed  the  need  for  an  EU  instrument  for  matrimonial 
property  regimes  that  covered  in  particular  applicable  law,  jurisdiction  and  the  recognition  and 
enforcement of decisions. A meeting with national experts was held on 23 March 2010 to discuss 
the thrust of the proposal being drafted. Finally, the Commission conducted a joint impact study on 
the  proposals  for  regulations  on  matrimonial  property  regimes  and  the  property  consequences  of 
registered partnerships.  

The two new proposals regarding matrimonial property regimes and the property consequences of 
registered  partnerships  contain  solutions  similar  to  those  presented  in  the  2011  proposals  taking 
into account the discussions in the Council and the European Parliament up to the end of 2015. 

9 

10 

ASSER-UCL Consortium, Study in comparative law on the rules governing conflicts of jurisdiction and laws 
on matrimonial property regimes and the implementation for property issues of the separation of unmarried 
couples in the Member States.  
See: http://europa.eu.int/comm/justice_home/doc_centre/civil/studies/doc_civil_studies_en.htm 
COM(2006) 400. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

                                                 
 
3. 

LEGAL ASPECTS OF THE PROPOSAL 

3.1. 

Legal basis 

The legal basis for this proposal is Article 81(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European 
Union, which confers on the Council the power to adopt measures concerning family law having 
cross-border implications by unanimity after consulting the European Parliament. 

A  matrimonial  property  regime  derives  from  the  existence  of  a  family  relationship  between  the 
individuals  involved.  Matrimonial  property  regimes  are  closely  linked  with  marriage  so,  even  if 
they  concern  property  relationships  between  spouses  and  between  spouses  and  third  parties,  they 
must be considered as part of family law. They exist where a marriage exists and disappear when 
the  marriage  is  dissolved  (following  a  divorce  or  legal  separation  or  the  death  of  one  of  the 
spouses).  

The  aim  of  the  proposal  is  to  establish  a  comprehensive  set  of  rules  of  international  private  law 
applicable  to  matrimonial  property  regimes.  It  therefore  deals  with  matters  of  jurisdiction, 
applicable  law  and  the  recognition  and  enforcement  of  decisions  in  matrimonial  property  cases. 
The  rules  proposed  are  concerned  only  with  cross-border  cases.  The  cross-border  requirement  in 
Article 81(3) is consequently fulfilled. This proposal only concerns the property consequences of 
the marriage and does not define the institution of marriage nor does it impose the recognition of a 
marriage in another Member State. 

3.2. 

Subsidiarity principle 

The only way of achieving the proposal's objectives is through the adoption of common rules on 
matrimonial property regimes, rules which must be identical in all participating Member States in 
order to guarantee legal certainty and predictability for citizens. Unilateral action by Member States 
would therefore run counter to this objective. There are two international conventions of the Hague 
Conference on Private International Law relevant to this issue, namely the Convention of 17 July 
1905 on conflict of laws relating to the effects of marriage on the rights and duties of spouses in 
their personal relationships and with regard to their estates, and the Convention of 14 March 1978 
on the law applicable to matrimonial property regimes. However, only three Member States have 
ratified  them  and  they  do  not  offer  the  solutions  needed  to  deal  with  the  scale  of  the  problems 
covered by this proposal, as revealed by the impact study and the public hearings. Given the nature 
and the scale of the problems experienced by Union citizens, the proposal's objectives can only be 
achieved at Union level. 

3.3. 

Proportionality principle 

The proposal complies with the principle of proportionality in that it is strictly limited to what is 
necessary to achieve its objectives. It does not try to harmonise the substantive laws of the Member 
States  concerning  matrimonial  property  regimes  and  does  not  affect  the  way  in  which  the 
liquidation  of  matrimonial  property  regimes  is  taxed  by  Member  States.  The  proposal  will  not 
entail any financial or administrative burdens on citizens and only a very limited additional burden 
on national authorities. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

3.4. 

Impact on fundamental rights 

In  accordance  with  the  strategy  for  the  effective  implementation  of  the  Charter  of  Fundamental 
Rights by the European Union11, the Commission has checked that the proposal complies with the 
rights set out in the Charter. 

It does not affect the right to respect for private and family life nor the right to marry and to found a 
family according to national laws, as provided for in Articles 7 and 9 of the Charter.  

The right to property referred to in Article 17 of the Charter is strengthened. The predictability of 
the  law  applicable  to  the  couple's  property  will  in  fact  enable  spouses  to  exercise  their  property 
rights more fully.  

The Commission has also checked that the proposal complies with Article 9 of the Charter on the 
right to marry and the right to found a family in accordance with national laws, and with Article 21 
of the Charter, which prohibits any discrimination.  

Finally, the proposal would increase citizens' access to justice in the EU, in particular for married 
couples. It would facilitate implementation of Article 47 of the Charter, which guarantees the right 
to an effective remedy and to a fair trial. By setting out objective criteria for determining the court 
having jurisdiction, parallel proceedings and appeals precipitated by the most active party can be 
avoided. 

3.5. 

Choice of instrument 

The need for legal certainty and predictability calls for clear and uniform rules and requires that the 
legislation take the form of a regulation. The proposed rules on jurisdiction, applicable law and free 
circulation of decisions are set out clearly and in detail, requiring no transposition into national law. 
The  objectives  of  legal  certainty  and  predictability  would  be  compromised  if  the  Member  States 
had discretion with regard to implementing the rules. 

4. 

BUDGETARY IMPACT, SIMPLIFICATION AND CONSISTENCY WITH OTHER UNION POLICIES 

4.1. 

Budgetary impact 

The proposal will have no impact on the Union budget. 

4.2. 

Simplification 

The  harmonisation  of  the  rules  on  jurisdiction  will  greatly  simplify  procedures  by  making  it 
possible to determine the court with jurisdiction over a matrimonial property case on the basis of 
common  rules.  If  courts  seised  with  divorce  proceedings,  legal  separation,  annulment  of  the 
marriage or a succession case following the death of one of the spouses in application of existing 
EU legislation have their jurisdiction extended to related matrimonial property regime proceedings, 
citizens will be able to have the same court deal with all aspects of their situation. 

The  harmonisation  of  conflict-of-law  rules  will  considerably  simplify  procedures  by  establishing 
which law is applicable on the basis of a single set of rules replacing the various national conflict-
of-law rules of the participating Member States. 

11 

Communication from the Commission, COM(2010) 573 of 19.10.2010. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

                                                 
Finally, the rules proposed for the recognition and enforcement of court decisions will facilitate the 
movement of citizens between different Member States. 

4.3. 

Consistency with other Union policies 

This proposal is part of the Commission's efforts to dismantle the obstacles faced by EU citizens in 
their daily lives when they try to exercise the rights the EU confers on them, as outlined in the 2010 
EU Citizenship Report referred to earlier. 

5. 

COMMENTS ON THE ARTICLES 

5.1. 

Chapter I: Scope and definitions 

Article 1  

The  notion  of  'matrimonial  property  regime'  must  be  given  an  autonomous  interpretation  and 
embrace considerations of both the spouses' daily management of their property and the liquidation 
of their property regime as a result of the couple's separation or the death of one of the spouses. 

To determine the areas that will be covered it proved preferable to compile a comprehensive list of 
matters excluded from the Regulation. Thus, matters already covered by existing EU regulations, 
such as maintenance obligations12, especially between spouses, and matters arising from the law of 
succession13, are excluded from the scope of the Regulation. 

The  Regulation  does  not  affect  the  existence  or  validity  of  a  marriage  under  national  law  or  the 
recognition in one Member State of a marriage concluded in another Member State. It also does not 
affect matters of social security or the entitlement to rights to pension in case of divorce. 

The Regulation does not concern the nature of rights in rem relating to a property, the classification 
of property and of rights, or the determination of the prerogatives of the holder of such rights.  

The requirements to make an entry in the land register and the effects of an entry or failure to make 
an entry in this register are also excluded from the scope of the Regulation.  

Article 3 

For  the  sake  of  consistency  and  to  facilitate  their  understanding  and  uniform  application,  some 
definitions of terms used in this Regulation are common to other EU instruments in force. 

The  proposed  definition  of  'court'  includes  authorities  and  legal  professions  (such  as  notaries) 
which exercise judicial functions or act by delegation of power by a court, so that their decisions 
are treated as court decisions for the purposes of recognition and enforcement in a Member State 
other than the Member State where they were delivered. 

5.2. 

Chapter II: Jurisdiction 

Legal proceedings in connection with matrimonial property regimes often arise from the liquidation 
of the property when the couple ceases to exist, either as a result of the death of one of the spouses 
or of their divorce, legal separation or marriage annulment.  

12 
13 

Governed by Regulation (EC) No 4/2009, OJ L 7, 10.1.2009, p. 1. 
Governed by Regulation (EU) No 650/2012, OJ L 201, 27.7.2012, p. 107. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

                                                 
The aim of this Regulation is to enable citizens to have their various related procedures handled by 
the courts of the same Member State. To this end, the Regulation seeks to ensure that the rules to 
determine the jurisdiction of the courts called on to deal with the property aspects of marriages are 
in line with existing rules in other Union instruments and, in particular, to concentrate jurisdiction 
on the matrimonial property regime in the Member State whose courts are handling the succession 
of a spouse or the divorce, legal separation or marriage annulment. 

Article 4 

To ensure that, in the event of the death of one of the spouses, the competent court can handle both 
the succession of the deceased spouse and the liquidation of the matrimonial property regime, this 
article  provides  that  the  court  having  jurisdiction  for  the  succession  according  to  the  rules  laid 
down in Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 should also have jurisdiction to rule on the liquidation of 
the matrimonial property regime linked to the succession. 

Article 5 

Similarly,  the  court  with  jurisdiction  for  divorce  proceedings,  legal  separation  or  marriage 
annulment in accordance with Regulation (EC) 2201/2003 should also rule, in some instances if the 
spouses agree, on the liquidation of the matrimonial property regime arising from the divorce, legal 
separation or marriage annulment. 

Articles 6 and 7 

Article  6  provides  for  rules  governing  jurisdiction  that  would  apply  when  matters  of  the 
matrimonial  property  regime  are  not  linked  to  proceedings  on  succession  or  divorce,  legal 
separation or marriage annulment (for example, when the spouses want to change their matrimonial 
property  regime).  A  list  of  connecting  factors,  in  order  of  precedence,  would  determine  the 
Member  State  whose  courts  have  jurisdiction  to  deal  with  the  proceedings  on  the  matrimonial 
property regime.  

The proposed criteria include the habitual residence of the spouses, their last habitual residence if 
one of them still resides there or the habitual residence of the respondent; these widely used criteria 
frequently  coincide  with  the  location  of  the  spouses'  property.  A  final  criterion  is  the  common 
nationality of the spouses. 

In such cases, in order to enhance predictability and the freedom to choose of the spouses, Article 7 
would also allow the spouses to agree that the courts that should deal with matters of their property 
regime  should  be  the  courts  of  the  Member  State  whose  law  applies  to  the  matrimonial  property 
regime or the courts of the Member State where the marriage was celebrated. 

Article 9 

Exceptionally, the court of a Member State that has jurisidiction may decline such jurisdiction if 
the national law of its Member State does not recognise the marriage in question. In order to ensure 
the  spouses'  access  to  justice  in  such  cases,  the  spouses  can  agree  that  the  courts  of  the  Member 
State  whose  law  applies  to  the  matrimonial  property  regime  or  the  courts  of  the  Member  State 
where the marriage was celebrated will rule on the proceedings. Otherwise, the criteria laid down 
by Article 6 would determine the Member State whose courts should rule on the matter. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

Article 10 

Where no Member State has jurisdiction in application of the previous articles, this article ensures 
access to justice for spouses and interested third parties before the courts of the Member State in 
which one or both of the spouses has immoveable property. In these cases, the courts would only 
rule in respect of the immoveable property located in that Member State.   

5.3. 

Chapter III: Applicable law 

Article 20 

The law that would apply to matters of matrimonial property regime can be the law of a Member 
State or the law of a non-Member State. 

Article 21 

The option proposed in the Regulation is that of a single scheme: all the property of the spouses, 
regardless of its nature (moveable or immoveable) and location, would be subject to the same law, 
namely the law applicable to the matrimonial property regime.  

Immoveable property has a special place in the property of couples, and one of the possible options 
would have been to make it subject to the law of the country in which it is located (lex situs), thus 
allowing  the  dismemberment  of  the  law  applicable  to  the  matrimonial  property  regime.  This 
solution is, however, fraught with difficulties, particularly when it comes to the liquidation of the 
matrimonial  property,  in  that  it  would  lead  to  an  undesirable  fragmentation  of  the  unity  of  the 
matrimonial property (while the liabilities would remain in a single scheme), and to the application 
of  different  laws  to  different  properties  within  the  matrimonial  property  regime.  The  Regulation 
therefore provides that the law applicable to matrimonial property, whether chosen by the spouses 
or,  in  the  absence  of  any  such  choice,  determined  under  other  provisions,  will  apply  to  all  the 
couple's property, moveable or immoveable, irrespective of its location. 

Article 22 

During the consultations a broad consensus emerged in favour of according the parties a degree of 
freedom in choosing the law applicable to their matrimonial property regime in order to facilitate 
the spouses' management of their property. This option should be clearly regulated to prevent the 
law chosen from having little relation to the couple's real situation or past history: the law chosen 
must  therefore  be  the  law  of  the  habitual  residence  or  of  the  nationality  of  the  spouses  or  future 
spouses or of one of them.  

In  addition  to  the  possibility  for  the  spouses  to  choose  the  law  applicable  at  the  time  of  their 
marriage,  this  article  makes  provision  for  making  such  a  choice  later.  Similarly,  spouses  having 
chosen the applicable law at the time of their marriage may later decide to change it. If the spouses 
decide to change the law applicable to their property regime, they can only choose one of the laws 
that they could have chosen at the time of their marriage. 

Only  a  voluntary  change  of  applicable  law  is  possible.  The  Regulation  does  not  provide  for  any 
automatic change of applicable law without the parties expressing their consent to such change or 
without them having been notified, in order to avoid legal uncertainty. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

Furthermore,  to  prevent  a  change  of  the  law  applicable  to  the  matrimonial  property  regime  from 
having undesirable effects for the spouses, such a change is effective only in the future, unless the 
spouses decide to make it retrospective. 

The rights of third parties whose interests might be prejudiced by a change of the law applicable to 
the couple's matrimonial property regime are protected: the Regulation provides that the effects of a 
retroactive change of the law applicable to the matrimonial property regime cannot adversely affect 
the rights of third parties. 

Articles 23 -25  

These provisions set out rules on the procedures to follow by spouses to choose the applicable law 
and to agree on the matrimonial property regime through a matrimonial property agreement.  

Article 26 

When  spouses  do  not  choose  the  law  applicable  to  their  matrimonial  property  regime,  it  is 
important  to  have  common  rules  in  the  participating  Member  States  to  determine  what  law  is 
applicable in the absence of choice by the spouses. The applicable law would be identified using a 
list of objective connecting factors in order of precedence, which would ensure predictability both 
for the spouses and for third parties. These criteria are designed to reconcile the life actually lived 
by the couple, especially the establishment of their first common habitual residence, and the need 
to be able to easily determine the law applicable to their matrimonial property regime. However, 
exceptionally, one of the spouses can ask a court that the law applicable should be the law of the 
State where the spouses had their last common habitual residence. 

Articles 27 and 28 

The  Regulation  lists  some  of  the  matters  that  would  be  governed  by  the  law  applicable  to  the 
matrimonial  property  regime.  Such  matters  include  the  liquidation  of  the  property  and  also  the 
effects of the matrimonial property regime on the relationships between a spouse and a third party. 
However, in order to protect the rights of third parties, the Regulation provides that a spouse cannot 
invoke the applicable law against a third party in a dispute unless the third party knew or should 
have known the law applicable to the property regime. The Regulation specifies the cases in which 
it  would  be  considered  that  the  third  party  knew  or  should  have  known  the  applicable  law  that 
governs the matrimonial property regime. 

Article 30 

To  take  account  of  national  rules  for  the  protection  of  the  family  home,  this  provision  allows  a 
Member  State  to  set  aside  the  application  of  a  foreign  law  in  favour  of  its  own.  Accordingly,  to 
protect the family home, a Member State where the family home is located may apply its own rules 
for the protection of the family home. Exceptionally, this Member State may apply its own law to 
all persons living on its territory in 'preference' to the law normally applicable or that of a marriage 
agreement concluded in another Member State.  

5.4. 

Chapter IV: Recognition, enforceability and enforcement 

The proposed Regulation provides for the free circulation of decisions, authentic instruments and 
court  settlements  concerning  matrimonial  property  regimes.  It  would  thus  introduce  mutual 

EN 

10 

   EN 

recognition based on the mutual trust arising out of the integration of the Member States within the 
Union. 

This  free  circulation  would  take  the  form  of  a  uniform  procedure  for  the  recognition  and 
enforcement  of  decisions,  authentic  acts  and  legal  transactions  originating  in  another  Member 
State.  The  procedure  replaces  the  national  procedures  currently  in  force  in  the  different  Member 
States. The grounds for non-recognition or refusal to enforce are also harmonised at Union level or 
reduced  to  the  absolute  minimum.  They  replace  the  varied,  and  often  broader,  grounds  that 
currently exist at national level. 

Decisions  

The  proposed  rules  on  the  recognition  and  enforcement  of  decisions  are  in  line  with  those 
contained  in  Regulation  No  650/2012  on  succession.  They  therefore  refer  to  the  exequatur 
procedure laid down in that Regulation. This means that any decision of a Member State would be 
recognised  in  other  Member  States  without  any  special  procedure  and  that,  to  have  a  decision 
enforced  in  another  Member  State,  applicants  would  have  to  follow  a  uniform  procedure  in  the 
Member State of enforcement to obtain a declaration of enforceability. The procedure is unilateral 
and  is  initially  confined  to  a  verification  of  documents.  Only  at  a  later  stage,  if  the  defendant 
objects,  would  the  judge  proceed  to  consider  possible  grounds  for  refusal.  This  offers  adequate 
protection of the rights of defendants. 

These  rules  are  a  major  step  forward  compared  with  the  current  situation.  At  present,  the 
recognition  and  enforcement  of  decisions  is  governed  by  the  Member  States'  national  laws  or 
bilateral  agreements  between  some  Member  States.  The  procedures  to  be  followed  vary  with  the 
Member  States  concerned,  as  do  the  documents  required  for  obtaining  a  declaration  of 
enforceability and the grounds on which foreign decisions may be rejected. 

As explained earlier, this Regulation is a first step in the area of matrimonial property regimes and 
it  concerns  family  law  (see  point  3.1).  Given  its  specific  circumstances,  the  free  circulation  of 
decisions  is  subject  to  the  exequatur  procedure.  Nevertheless,  the  removal  of  intermediate 
proceedings (exequatur) could, as in other areas, be considered at a later stage, after an evaluation 
of  the  application  of  the  rules  in  this  Regulation  and  the  development  of  judicial  cooperation  on 
matrimonial property regimes and related areas, notably the Brussels IIa Regulation14. 

The acts of authorities exercising their powers by delegation in accordance with the definition of a 
court in Article 3 of this Regulation would be treated as court decisions and thus covered by the 
provisions on recognition and enforcement under this chapter. 

Authentic instruments 

Given  the  practical  importance  of  authentic  instruments  for  matrimonial  property  regimes  and  in 
order to ensure the consistency of this Regulation with other EU instruments, this Regulation must 
ensure their acceptancefor the purposes of their free circulation. 

14 

Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 of 27 November 2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and 
enforcement  of  judgments  in  matrimonial  matters  and  the  matters  of  parental  responsibility,  repealing 
Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000, OJ L 338, 23.12.2003.  

EN 

11 

   EN 

                                                 
This acceptance means that they will enjoy the same evidentiary effect in respect of the contents of 
the  instrument  and  the  facts  contained  therein,  and  the  same  presumption  of  authenticity  and 
enforceability as in the country of origin. 

EN 

12 

   EN 

2016/0059 (CNS) 

Proposal for a 

COUNCIL REGULATION 

on jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of 
matrimonial property regimes  

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, 

Having  regard  to  the  Treaty  on  the Functioning  of  the  European  Union,  and  in  particular  Article 
81(3) thereof, 

Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission, 

After transmission of the draft legislative act to the national parliaments, 

Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament15, 

Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee16, 

Acting in accordance with a special legislative procedure,  

Whereas: 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

(4) 

The European Union has set itself the objective of maintaining and developing an area of 
freedom,  security  and  justice  in  which  the  free  movement  of  persons  is  ensured.  For  the 
gradual  establishment  of  such  an  area,  the  Union  is  to  adopt  measures  relating  to  judicial 
cooperation  in  civil  matters  having  cross-border  implications,  particularly  when  necessary 
for the proper functioning of the internal market. 

In  accordance  with  point  c)  of  Article  81(2)  of  the  Treaty  on  the  Functioning  of  the 
European Union, such measures may include measures aimed at ensuring the compatibility 
of the rules applicable in the Member States concerning conflict of laws and of jurisdiction. 

The  European  Council  meeting  in  Tampere  on  15  and  16  October  1999  endorsed  the 
principle of mutual recognition of judgments and other decisions of judicial authorities as 
the  cornerstone  of  judicial  cooperation  in  civil  matters  and  invited  the  Council  and  the 
Commission to adopt a programme of measures to implement that principle. 

A programme of measures for the implementation of the principle of mutual recognition of 
decisions in civil and commercial matters17, common to the Commission and to the Council, 
was  adopted  on  30 November  2000.  That  programme  identifies  measures  relating  to  the 
harmonisation  of  conflict-of-law  rules  as  measures  facilitating  the  mutual  recognition  of 

15 
16 
17 

OJ C […], […], p. […]. 
OJ C […], […], p. […]. 
OJ C 12, 15.1.2001, p. 1. 

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
                                                 
(5) 

(6) 

(7) 

(8) 

(9) 

decisions  and  provides  for  the  drawing-up  of  an  instrument  in  matters  of  matrimonial 
property regimes.  

The  European  Council  meeting  in  Brussels  on  4  and  5  November  2004  adopted  a  new 
programme  called  'The  Hague  Programme:  strengthening  freedom,  security  and  justice  in 
the European Union'18. In this programme the Council asked the Commission to present a 
Green  Paper  on  conflicts  of  law  in  matters  concerning  matrimonial  property  regimes, 
including the question of jurisdiction and mutual recognition. The programme also stressed 
the need to adopt an instrument in this area. 

On 17 July 2006 the Commission adopted the Green Paper on the conflict of laws in matters 
concerning matrimonial property regimes, including the question of jurisdiction and mutual 
recognition19.  This  Green  Paper  launched  wide  consultations  on  all  aspects  of  the 
difficulties  faced  by  couples  in  Europe  when  it  comes  to  the  liquidation  of  their  common 
property and the legal remedies available. 

At its  meeting in Brussels on 10  and 11 December 2009 the European Council  adopted a 
new  multiannual  programme  called  'the  Stockholm  Programme  –  An  open  and  secure 
Europe  serving  and  protecting  citizens'20.  In  that  programme  the  European  Council 
considered that mutual recognition should be extended to fields that are not yet covered but 
are  essential  to  everyday  life,  for  example  matrimonial  property  rights,  while  taking  into 
consideration  Member  States'  legal  systems,  including  public  policy  (ordre  public),  and 
national traditions in this area. 

In  the  'EU  Citizenship  Report  2010:  Dismantling  the  obstacles  to  EU  citizens’  rights', 
adopted on 27 October 201021, the Commission announced that it would adopt a proposal 
for legislation to eliminate the obstacles to the free movement of persons, in particular the 
difficulties experienced by couples in managing or dividing their property. 
On  16  March  2011,  the  Commission  adopted  a  proposal22  for  a  Council  Regulation  on 
jurisdiction, applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of 
matrimonial  property  regimes  and  a  proposal23  for  a  Council  Regulation  on  jurisdiction, 
applicable  law  and  the  recognition  and  enforcement  of  decisions  regarding  the  property 
consequences of registered partnerships. 

(10)  At  its  meeting  of  3  December  2015,  the  Council  concluded  that  no  unanimity  could  be 
reached  for  the  adoption  of  the  proposals  for  the  regulations  on  matrimonial  property 
regimes  and  the  property  consequences  of  registered  partnerships  and  that  therefore  the 
objectives of cooperation in this area could not be attained within a reasonable period by the 
Union as a whole.  

(11)  From  December  2015  to  February  2016,  Sweden,  Belgium,  Greece,  Croatia,  Slovenia, 
Spain,  France,  Portugal,  Italy,  Malta,  Luxembourg,  Germany,  the  Czech  Republic,  the 
Netherlands,  Austria,  Bulgaria  and  Finland  addressed  requests  to  the  Commission 
indicating  that  they  wished  to  establish  enhanced  cooperation  between  themselves  in  the 
area  of  the  property  regimes  of  international  couples  and,  specifically,  of  the  jurisdiction, 

18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 

OJ L 53, 3.3.2005, p. 1. 
COM(2006) 400. 
OJ L 115, 4.5.2010, p. 1. 
COM(2010) 603. 
COM (2011) 126. 
COM (2011) 127. 

EN 

14 

   EN 

                                                 
applicable law and the recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of matrimonial 
property  regimes  and  jurisdiction,  applicable  law  and  the  recognition  and  enforcement  of 
decisions  regarding  the  property  consequences  of  registered  partnerships,  and  asking  the 
Commission to submit a proposal to the Council to that effect. 

(12)  On […], the Council adopted Decision […] authorising enhanced cooperation in the area of 
jurisdiction,  applicable  law  and  the  recognition  and  enforcement  of  decisions  on  the 
property  regimes  of  international  couples,  covering  both  matters  of  matrimonial  property 
regimes and the property consequences of registered partnerships. 

(13)  According to Article 328(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, when 
enhanced cooperation is being established, it is to be open to all Member States, subject to 
compliance with any conditions of participation laid down by the authorising decision. It is 
also  to  be  open  to  them  at  any  other  time,  subject  to  compliance  with  the  acts  already 
adopted  within  that  framework,  in  addition  to  those  conditions.  The  Commission  and  the 
Member  States  participating  in  enhanced  cooperation  should  ensure  that  they  promote 
participation by as many Member States as possible. This Regulation should be binding in 
its  entirety  and  directly  applicable  only  in  the  participating  Member  States  in  accordance 
with the Treaties. 

(14) 

In accordance with Article 81 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, this 
Regulation should apply in the context of matrimonial property regimes having cross-border 
implications. 

(15)  To provide married couples with legal certainty as to their property and offer them a degree 
of predictability, all the rules applicable to matrimonial property regimes should be covered 
in a single instrument.  

(16) 

In  order  to  achieve  those  objectives,  this  Regulation  should  bring  together  provisions  on  
jurisdiction,  applicable law, recognition  or,  as  the  case  may  be,  acceptance,  enforceability 
and enforcement of decisions, authentic instruments and court settlements. 

(17)  This  Regulation  does  not  define  'marriage',  which  is  defined  by  the  national  laws  of  the 

Member States. 

(18)  The  scope  of  this  Regulation  should  include  all  civil-law  aspects  of  matrimonial  property 
regimes,  both  the  daily  management  of  matrimonial  property  and  the  liquidation  of  the 
regime, in particular as a result of the couple's separation or the death of one of the spouses. 
For  the  purposes  of  this  Regulation,  the  term  'matrimonial  property  regime'  should  be 
interpreted autonomously and should encompass not only rules from which the spouses may 
not derogate but also any optional rules to which the spouses may agree in accordance with 
the applicable law, as well as any default rules of the applicable law. It includes not only 
property  arrangements  specifically  and  exclusively  envisaged  by  certain  national  legal 
systems in the case of marriage but also any property relationships, between the spouses and 
in their relations with third parties, resulting directly from the matrimonial relationship, or 
the dissolution thereof. 

(19)  For  reasons  of  clarity,  a  number  of  questions  which  could  be  seen  as  having  a  link  with 
matters of matrimonial property regime should be explicitly excluded from the scope of this 
Regulation.  

(20)  Accordingly, this Regulation should not apply to questions of general legal capacity of the 
spouses; however, this exclusion should not cover the specific powers and rights of either or 
both  spouses  with  regard  to  property,  either  as  between  themselves  or  as  regards  third 
parties, as these powers and rights should fall under the scope of the Regulation.  

EN 

15 

   EN 

(21) 

It  should  not  apply  to  other  preliminary  questions  such  as  the  existence,  validity  or 
recognition of a marriage, which continue to be covered by the national law of the Member 
States, including their rules of private international law.   

(22)  As maintenance obligations between spouses are governed by Regulation (EC) No 4/2009 
of  18  December  2008  on  jurisdiction,  applicable  law,  recognition  and  enforcement  of 
decisions and cooperation in matters relating to maintenance obligations24, they should be 
excluded from the scope of this Regulation, as should issues relating to the succession to the 
estate  of  a  deceased  spouse  covered  by  Regulation  (EU)  No  650/2012  of  the  European 
Parliament and of the Council on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement 
of  decisions  and  authentic  instruments  in  matters  of  succession  and  the  creation  of  a 
European Certificate of Succession25. 

(23) 

Issues of entitlements to transfer or adjustement between spouses of rights to retirement or 
disability  pension,  whatever  their  nature,  accrued  during  marriage  and  which  have  not 
generated pension income during the marriage are matters that should remain excluded from 
the  scope  of  this  Regulation,  taking  into  account  the  specific  systems  existing  in  the 
Member States. However, such exception should remain of strict interpretation. Hence, this 
Regulation  should  govern  in  particular  the  issue  of  classification  of  pension  assets,  the 
amounts  that  have  already  been  paid  to  one  spouse  during  the  marriage,  and  the  possible 
compensation that would be granted in case of a pension subscribed with common assets.    

(24)  This Regulation should allow for the creation or the transfer resulting from the matrimonial 
property regime of a right in immoveable or moveable property as provided for in the law 
applicable  to  the  matrimonial  property  regime.  It  should,  however,  not  affect  the  limited 
number (‘numerus clausus ’) of rights in rem known in the national law of some Member 
States.  A  Member  State  should  not  be  required  to  recognise  a  right  in  rem  relating  to 
property located in that Member State if the right in rem in question is not known in its law. 

(25)  However, in order to allow the spouses to enjoy in another Member State the rights which 
have been created or transferred to them as a result of the matrimonial property regime, this 
Regulation  should  provide  for  the  adaptation  of  an  unknown  right  in  rem  to  the  closest 
equivalent  right  under  the  law  of  that  other  Member  State.  In  the  context  of  such  an 
adaptation,  account  should  be  taken  of  the  aims  and  the  interests  pursued  by  the  specific 
right  in  rem  and  the  effects  attached  to  it.  For  the  purposes  of  determining  the  closest 
equivalent  national  right,  the  authorities  or  competent  persons  of  the  State  whose  law 
applied to the matrimonial property regime may be contacted for further information on the 
nature and the effects of the right. To that end, the existing networks in the area of judicial 
cooperation in civil and commercial matters could be used, as  well as any other available 
means facilitating the understanding of foreign law. 

(26)  The  adaptation  of  unknown  rights  in  rem  as  explicitly  provided  for  by  this  Regulation 
should  not  preclude  other  forms  of  adaptation  in  the  context  of  the  application  of 
this Regulation. 

(27)  The  requirements  for  the  recording  in  a  register  of  a  right  in  immoveable  or  moveable 
property  should  be  excluded  from  the  scope  of this  Regulation.  It  should  therefore  be  the 
law of the Member State in which the register is kept (for immoveable property, the lex rei 
sitae) which determines under what legal conditions and how the recording must be carried 
out and which authorities, such as land registers or notaries, are in charge of checking that 

24 
25 

OJ L 7, 10.1.2009, p. 1. 
OJ L 201, 27.7.2012, p. 107. 

EN 

16 

   EN 

                                                 
all requirements are met and that the documentation presented or established is sufficient or 
contains the necessary information. In particular, the authorities may check that the right of 
a spouse to a property mentioned in the document presented for registration is a right which 
is recorded as such in the register or which is otherwise demonstrated in accordance with 
the law of the Member State in which the register is kept. In order to avoid duplication of 
documents, the registration authorities should accept such documents drawn up in another 
Member  State  by  the  competent  authorities  the  circulation  of  which  is  provided  by  this 
Regulation. This should not preclude the authorities involved in the registration from asking 
the  person  applying  for  registration  to  provide  such  additional  information,  or  to  present 
such additional documents, as are required under the law of the Member State in which the 
register is kept, for instance information or documents relating to the payment of revenue. 
The  competent  authority  may  indicate  to  the  person  applying  for  registration  how  the 
missing information or documents can be provided. 

(28)  The effects of the recording of a right in a register should also be excluded from the scope 
of this Regulation. It should therefore be the law of the Member State in which the register 
is kept which determines whether the recording is, for instance, declaratory or constitutive 
in  effect.  Thus,  where,  for  example,  the  acquisition  of  a  right  in  immoveable  property 
requires a recording in a register under the law of the Member State in which the register is 
kept in order to ensure the erga omnes effect of registers or to protect legal transactions, the 
moment of such acquisition should be governed by the law of that Member State. 

(29)  This  Regulation  should  respect  the  different  systems  for  dealing  with  matters  of  the 
matrimonial  property  regime  applied  in  the  Member  States.  For  the  purposes  of  this 
Regulation, the term ‘court’ should therefore be given a broad meaning so as to cover not 
only courts in the true sense of the word, exercising judicial functions, but also for example 
notaries  in  some  Member States  who,  in  certain  matters  of  matrimonial  property  regime, 
exercise judicial functions like courts, and the notaries and legal professionals who, in some 
Member  States,  exercise  judicial  functions  in  a  given  matrimonial  property  regime  by 
delegation of power by a court. All courts as defined in this Regulation should be bound by 
the rules of jurisdiction set out in this Regulation. Conversely, the term ‘court’ should not 
cover  non-judicial  authorities  of  a  Member State  empowered  under  national  law  to  deal 
with  matters  of  matrimonial  property  regime,  such  as  the  notaries  in  most  Member States 
where, as is usually the case, they are not exercising judicial functions. 

(30)  This Regulation should allow all notaries who have competence in matters of matrimonial 
property  regime  in  the  Member  States  to  exercise  such  competence.  Whether  or  not  the 
notaries  in  a  given  Member  State  are  bound  by  the  rules  of  jurisdiction  set  out  in  this 
Regulation  should  depend  on  whether  or  not  they  are  covered  by  the  term  ‘court’  for  the 
purposes of this Regulation. 

(31)  Acts  issued  by  notaries  in  matters  of  matrimonial  property  regime  in  the  Member  States 
should  circulate  under  this  Regulation.  When  notaries  exercise  judicial  functions  they  are 
bound  by  the  rules  of  jurisdiction,  and  the  decisions  they  give  should  circulate  in 
accordance with the provisions on recognition, enforceability and enforcement of decisions. 
When  notaries  do  not  exercise  judicial  functions  they  are  not  bound  by  the  rules  of 
jurisdiction, and the authentic instruments they issue should circulate in accordance with the 
provisions on authentic instruments. 

(32)  To  reflect  the  increasing  mobility  of  couples  during  their  married  life  and  facilitate  the 
proper  administration  of  justice,  the  rules  on  jurisdiction  in  this  Regulation  should  enable 
citizens to have their various related procedures handled by the courts of the same Member 

EN 

17 

   EN 

State. To that end, the Regulation should seek to concentrate the jurisdiction on matrimonial 
property regime in the Member State whose courts are called upon to handle the succession 
of  a  spouse  or  the  divorce,  legal  separation  or  marriage  annulment  in  accordance  with, 
respectively, Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 or Council  Regulation (EC) No  2201/2003 of 
27  November  2003  concerning  jurisdiction  and  the  recognition  and  enforcement  of 
judgments  in  matrimonial  matters  and  the  matters  of  parental  responsibility,  repealing 
Regulation (EC) No 1347/200026.  

(33)  The  Regulation  should  provide  that,  where  proceedings  on  the  succession  of  a  spouse  are 
pending before the court of a Member State seised under Regulation (EU) No 650/2012, the 
courts  of  that  State  should  have  jurisdiction  to  rule  on  matters  of  matrimonial  property 
regimes linked to that succession case.  

(34)  Similarly, matters of matrimonial property regimes arising in connection with proceedings 
pending before the court of a Member State seised for divorce, legal separation or marriage 
annulment under Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003, should be dealt with by the courts of that 
Member  State  unless  the  jurisdiction  to  rule  on  the  divorce,  legal  separation  or  marriage 
annulement  may  only  be  based  on  specific  grounds  of  jurisdiction.  In  such  cases,  the 
concentration of jurisdiction should not be allowed without the spouses' agreement.   

(35)  Where matters of matrimonial property regime are not linked to proceedings pending before 
the court of a Member State on the succession of a spouse or on divorce, legal separation or 
marriage annulment, this Regulation should provide for a scale of connecting factors for the 
purposes of determining jurisdiction, starting with the habitual residence of the spouses at 
the  time  the  court  is  seised.  These  connecting  factors  are  set  in  view  of  the  increasing 
mobility of citizens and in order to ensure that a genuine connecting factor exists between 
the spouses and the Member State in which jurisdiction is exercised.  

(36) 

In  order  to  increase  legal  certainty,  predictability  and  the  autonomy  of  the  parties,  this 
Regulation should enable, under certain circumstances, the parties to conclude a choice of 
court agreement in favour of the courts of the Member State of the applicable law or of the 
courts of the Member State of the celebration of the marriage.   

(37)  For  the  purposes  of  the  application  of  this  Regulation  and  in  order  to  cover  all  possible 
situations, the Member State of the celebration of the marriage should be the Member State 
before whose authorities the marriage is celebrated.  

(38)  The  courts  of  a  Member  State  may  hold  that,  under  their  private  international  law,  the 
marriage in question cannot be recognised for the purposes of matrimonial property regime 
proceedings. In such a case, it may exceptionally be necessary to decline jurisdiction under 
this  Regulation.  The  courts  shall  act  swiftly  and  the  party  concerned  should  have  the 
possibility  to  submit  the  case  in  any  other  Member  State  that  has  a  connecting  factor 
granting  jurisdiction,  irrespective  of  the  order  of  these  jurisdiction  grounds,  while  at  the 
same  time  respecting  the  parties'  autonomy.  Any  court  seised  after  a  declining  of 
jurisdiction  other  than  the  courts  of  the  Member  State  of  the  celebration  of  the  marriage, 
may  also  exceptionally  need  to  decline  jurisdiction  under  the  same  conditions.  The 
combination of the various  jurisdiction rules should, however, ensure that parties have all 
possibilities  to  seise  the  courts  of  a  Member  State  which  will  accept  jurisdiction  for  the 
purposes of giving effect to their matrimonial property regime. 

(39)  This  Regulation  should  not  prevent  the  parties  from  settling  the  matrimonial  property 
regime case amicably out of court, for instance before a notary, in a Member State of their 

26 

OJ L 338, 23.12.2003, p. 1. 

EN 

18 

   EN 

                                                 
(40) 

(41) 

(42) 

(43) 

choice where this is possible under the law of that Member State. This should be the case 
even if the law applicable to the matrimonial property regime is not the law of that Member 
State.  

In order to ensure that the courts of all Member States may, on the same grounds, exercise 
jurisdiction  in  relation  to  the  matrimonial  property  regimes  of  spouses,  this  Regulation 
should  set  out  exhaustively  the  grounds  on  which  such  subsidiary  jurisdiction  may  be 
exercised. 

In  order  to  remedy,  in  particular,  situations  of  denial  of  justice,  this  Regulation  should 
provide  for  a  forum  necessitatis  allowing  a  court  of  a  Member  State,  on  an  exceptional 
basis,  to  rule  on  a  matrimonial  property  regime  which  is  closely  connected  with  a  third 
State.  Such  an  exceptional  basis  may  be  deemed  to  exist  when  proceedings  prove 
impossible in the third State in question, for example because of civil war, or when a spouse 
cannot reasonably be expected to initiate or conduct proceedings in that State. Jurisdiction 
based on forum necessitatis should, however, be exercised only if the case has a sufficient 
connection with the Member State of the court seised. 

In  the  interests  of  the  harmonious  functioning  of  justice,  the  giving  of  irreconcilable 
decisions in different Member States should be avoided. To that end, this Regulation should 
provide for general procedural rules similar to those of other Union instruments in the area 
of judicial cooperation in civil matters. One such procedural rule is a lis pendens rule, which 
will come into play if the same matrimonial property regime case is brought before different 
courts in different Member States. That rule will then determine which court should proceed 
to deal with the matrimonial property regime case. 

In order to allow citizens to avail themselves, with all legal certainty, of the benefits offered 
by the internal market, the Regulation should enable spouses to know in advance which law 
will  apply  to  their  matrimonial  property  regime.  Harmonised  conflict-of-law  rules  should 
therefore be introduced in order to avoid contradictory results. The main rule should ensure 
that  the  matrimonial  property  regime  is  governed  by  a  predictable  law  with  which  it  is 
closely connected. For reasons of legal certainty and in order to avoid the fragmentation of 
the  matrimonial  property  regime,  the  law  applicable  to  a  matrimonial  property  regime 
should govern that regime as a whole, that is to say, all the property covered by that regime, 
irrespective  of  the  nature  of  the  assets  and  regardless  of  whether  the  assets  are  located  in 
another Member State or in a third State. 

(44)  The law determined by this Regulation should apply even if it is not the law of a Member 

State. 

(45)  To facilitate to spouses the management of their property, this Regulation should authorise 
them  to  choose  the  law  applicable  to  their  matrimonial  property  regime,  regardless  of  the 
nature or location of the property, among the laws with which they have close links because 
of habitual residence or their nationality. This choice may be made at any moment, before 
the marriage, at the time of celebration of the marriage or during the course of the marriage.  

(46)  To ensure the legal certainty of transactions and to prevent any change of the law applicable 
to  the  matrimonial  property  regime  being  made  without  the  spouses  being  notified,  no 
change of law applicable to the matrimonial property regime should be made except at the 
express  desire  of  the  parties.  Such  a  change  by  the  spouses  should  not  have  retrospective 
effect unless they expressly so stipulate. Whatever the case, it may not infringe the rights of 
third parties.  

EN 

19 

   EN 

(47)  Rules on the material and formal validity of the agreement on the choice of applicable law 
should be defined so that the informed choice of the spouses is facilitated and their consent 
is respected with a view to ensuring legal certainty as well as better access to justice. As far 
as  formal  validity  is  concerned,  certain  safeguards  should  be  introduced  to  ensure  that 
spouses  are  aware  of  the  implications  of  their  choice.  The  agreement  on  the  choice  of 
applicable  law  should  at  least  be  expressed  in  writing,  dated  and  signed  by  both  parties. 
However,  if  the  law  of  the  Member  State  in  which  the  two  spouses  have  their  habitual 
residence at the time the agreement is concluded lays down additional formal  rules, those 
rules should be complied with. If, at the time the agreement is concluded, the spouses are 
habitually  resident  in  different  Member  States  which  lay  down  different  formal  rules, 
compliance  with  the  formal  rules  of  one  of  these  States  should  suffice.  If,  at  the  time  the 
agreement  is  concluded,  only  one  of  the  spouses  is  habitually  resident  in  a  Member  State 
which lays down additional formal rules, these rules should be complied with.   

(48)  A  matrimonial  property  agreement  is  a  type  of  disposition  on  matrimonial  property  the 
admissibility and acceptance of which vary among the Member States. In order to make it 
easier  for  matrimonial  property  rights  acquired  as  a  result  of  a  matrimonial  property 
agreement to be accepted in the Member States, rules on the formal validity of matrimonial 
property  agreements  should  be  defined.  At  least  the  agreement  should  be  expressed  in 
writing,  dated  and  signed  by  both  parties.  However,  the  agreement  should  also  fulfil 
additional  formal  validity  requirements  set  out  in  the  law  applicable  to  the  matrimonial 
property  regime  as  determined  by  the  Regulation  and  in  the  law  of  the  Member  State  in 
which  the  spouses  have  their  habitual  residence.  This  Regulation  should  also  determine 
which law is to govern the material validity of such agreement. 

(49)  Where no applicable law is chosen, and with a view to reconciling predictability and legal 
certainty with consideration of the life actually lived by the couple, this Regulation should 
introduce  harmonised  conflict-of-law  rules  to  determine  the  law  applicable  to  all  the 
spouses' property on the basis of a scale of connecting factors. The first common habitual 
residence of the spouses shortly after marriage should constitute the first criterion, ahead of 
the law of the spouses' common nationality at the time of their marriage. If neither of these 
criteria apply, or failing a first common habitual residence in cases where the spouses have 
dual common nationalities at the time of the celebration of the marriage, the third criterion 
should  be  the  law  of  the  State  with  which  the  spouses  have  the  closest  links,  taking  into 
account  all  the circumstances, it being made clear  that these links are  to be considered as 
they were at the time the marriage was entered into. 

(50)  Where  this  Regulation  refers  to  nationality  as  a  connecting  factor,  the  question  of  how  to 
consider a person having multiple nationalities is a preliminary question which falls outside 
the  scope  of  this  Regulation  and  should   be   left   to   national   law,  including,  where 
applicable,  international  Conventions,  in  full  observance  of  the  general  principles  of  the 
European   Union.  This  consideration  should  have  no  effect  on  the  validity  of  a  choice  of 
law made in accordance with this Regulation. 

(51)  With regard to the determination of the law applicable to the matrimonial property regime 
in  the  absence  of  a  choice  of  law  and  a  matrimonial  property  agreement,  the  judicial 
authority of a Member State, at the request of either of the spouses, should, in exceptional 
cases  –  where  the  spouses  have  moved  to  the  State  of  their  habitual  residence  for  a  long 
duration  –  be  able  to  arrive  at  the  conclusion  that  the  law  of  that  State  may  apply  if  the 
spouses have relied on it. Whatever the case, it may not infringe the rights of third parties. 

EN 

20 

   EN 

(52)  The law determined as the law applicable to the matrimonial property regime should govern 
the matrimonial property regime from the classification of property of one or both spouses 
into different categories during the marriage and after its dissolution, to the liquidation of 
the  property.  It  should  include  the  effects  of  the  matrimonial  property  regime  on  a  legal 
relationship between a spouse and third parties. However, the law applicable to matrimonial 
property  regime  may  be  invoked  against  a  third  party  by  a  spouse  to  govern  such  effects 
only when the legal relations between the spouse and the third party arose at a time where 
the third party knew or should have known of that law.  

(53)  Considerations of public interest, such as the protection of a Member State's political, social 
or economic organisation, should justify giving the courts and other competent authorities 
of the Member States the possibility, in exceptional cases, of applying exceptions based on 
overriding  mandatory  provisions.  Accordingly,  the  concept  of  "overriding  mandatory 
provisions" should cover rules of imperative nature such as rules for the protection of the 
family  home.  However,  this  exception  to  the  application  of  the  law  applicable  to  the 
matrimonial  property  regime  requires  a  strict  interpretation  in  order  to  remain  compatible 
with the general objective of this Regulation.  

(54)  Considerations  of  public  interest  should  also  allow  courts  and  other  competent  authorities 
dealing with matters of matrimonial property regime in the Member States to disregard, in 
exceptional  circumstances,  certain  provisions  of  a  foreign  law  where,  in  a  given  case, 
applying  such  provisions  would  be  manifestly  incompatible  with  the  public  policy  (ordre 
public) of the Member State concerned. However, the courts or other competent authorities 
should  not  be  able  to  apply  the  public  policy  exception  in  order  to  set  aside  the  law  of 
another  State  or  to  refuse  to  recognise  —  or,  as  the  case  may  be,  accept  —  or  enforce  a 
decision,  an  authentic  instrument  or  a  court  settlement  from  another  Member  State  when 
doing so would be contrary to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, 
and in particular Article 21 thereof on the principle of non-discrimination. 

(55)  Since  there  are  States  in  which  two  or  more  systems  of  law  or  sets  of  rules  concerning 
matters  governed  by  this  Regulation  coexist,  there  should  be  a  provision  governing  the 
extent to which this Regulation applies in the different territorial units of those States.   

(56) 

(57) 

In the light of its general objective, which is the mutual recognition of decisions given in the 
Member States in matters of matrimonial property regime, this Regulation should lay down 
rules  relating  to  the  recognition,  enforceability  and  enforcement  of  decisions  similar  to 
those of other Union instruments in the area of judicial cooperation in civil matters. 

In order to take into account the different systems for dealing with matters of matrimonial 
property  regimes  in  the  Member  States,  this  Regulation  should  guarantee  the  acceptance 
and enforceability in all Member States of authentic instruments in matters of matrimonial 
property regime. 

(58)  Authentic instruments should have the same evidentiary effects in another Member State as 
they have in the Member State of origin, or the most comparable effects. When determining 
the evidentiary effects of a given authentic instrument in another Member State or the most 
comparable effects, reference should be made to the nature and the scope of the evidentiary 
effects  of  the  authentic  instrument  in  the  Member  State  of  origin.  The  evidentiary  effects 
which  a  given  authentic  instrument  should  have  in  another  Member  State  will  therefore 
depend on the law of the Member State of origin. 

(59)  The  ‘authenticity’  of  an  authentic  instrument  should  be  an  autonomous  concept  covering 
elements  such  as  the  genuineness  of  the  instrument,  the  formal  prerequisites  of  the 

EN 

21 

   EN 

instrument, the powers of the authority drawing up the instrument and the procedure under 
which the instrument is drawn up. It should also cover the factual elements recorded in the 
authentic instrument by the authority concerned, such as the fact that the parties indicated 
appeared  before  that  authority  on  the  date  indicated  and  that  they  made  the  declarations 
indicated. A party  wishing to challenge the  authenticity of an authentic instrument should 
do so before the competent court in the Member State of origin of the authentic instrument 
under the law of that Member State. 

(60)  The term ‘the legal acts or legal relationships recorded in an authentic instrument’ should be 
interpreted as referring to the contents as to substance recorded in the authentic instrument.  
A  party  wishing  to  challenge  the  legal  acts  or legal  relationships  recorded  in  an  authentic 
instrument should do so before the courts having jurisdiction under this Regulation, which 
should  decide  on  the  challenge  in  accordance  with  the  law  applicable  to  the  matrimonial 
property regime.  

(61) 

If  a  question  relating  to  the  legal  acts  or  legal  relationships  recorded  in  an  authentic 
instrument  is  raised  as  an  incidental  question  in  proceedings  before  a  court  of  a 
Member State, that court should have jurisdiction over that question. 

(62)  An  authentic  instrument  which  is  being  challenged  should  not  produce  any  evidentiary 
effects in a Member State other than the Member State of origin as long as the challenge is 
pending. If the challenge concerns only a specific matter relating to the legal acts or legal 
relationships  recorded  in  the  authentic  instrument,  the  authentic  instrument  in  question 
should not produce any evidentiary effects in a Member State other than the Member State 
of origin with regard to the matter being challenged as long as the challenge is pending. An 
authentic instrument which has been declared invalid as a result of a challenge should cease 
to produce any evidentiary effects. 

(63)  Should an authority, in application of this Regulation, be presented with two incompatible 
authentic instruments, it should assess the question as to which authentic instrument, if any, 
should be given priority taking into account the circumstances of the particular case. Where 
it is not clear from those circumstances which authentic instrument, if any, should be given 
priority,  the  question  should  be  determined  by  the  courts  having  jurisdiction  under  this 
Regulation  or,  where  the  question  is  raised  as  an  incidental  question  in  the  course  of 
proceedings,  by  the  court  seised  of  those  proceedings.  In  the  event  of  incompatibility 
between an authentic instrument and a decision, regard should be had to the grounds of non-
recognition of decisions under this Regulation. 

(64)  The recognition and enforcement of a decision on matrimonial property regime under this 
Regulation  should  not  in  any  way  imply  the  recognition  of  the  marriage  underlying  the 
matrimonial property regime which gave rise to the decision. 

(65)  The  relationship  between  this  Regulation  and  the  bilateral  or  multilateral  conventions  on 

matrimonial property regime to which the Member States are party should be specified.  

(66)  This Regulation should not preclude Member States which are parties to the Convention of 
6  February  1931  between  Denmark,  Finland,  Iceland,  Norway  and  Sweden  containing 
international law provisions on marriage, adoption and guardianship, as revised in 2006; to 
the  Convention  of  19  November  1934  between  Denmark,  Finland,  Iceland,  Norway  and 
Sweden  comprising  private  international  law  provisions  on  succession,  wills  and  estate 
administration, as revised in June 2012; and to the Convention of 11 October 1977 between 
Denmark,  Finland,  Iceland,  Norway  and  Sweden  on  the  recognition  and  enforcement  of 
judgments in civil matters, from continuing to apply certain provisions of these Conventions 

EN 

22 

   EN 

(67) 

in so far as they provide for simplified and more expeditious procedures for the recognition 
and enforcement of decisions in matters of matrimonial property regime. 

In  order  to  facilitate  the  application  of  this  Regulation,  provision  should  be  made  for  an 
obligation  requiring  Member  States  to  communicate  certain  information  regarding  their 
legislation  and  procedures  relating  to  matrimonial  property  regimes  within  the  framework 
of the  European Judicial  Network  in  civil and commercial matters established by Council 
Decision 2001/470/EC27. In order to allow for the timely publication in the Official Journal 
of the European Union of all information of relevance for the practical application of this 
Regulation,  the  Member  States  should  also  communicate  such  information  to  the 
Commission before this Regulation starts to apply.  

(68)  Equally, to facilitate the application of this Regulation and to allow for the use of modern 
communication technologies, standard forms should be prescribed for the attestations to be 
provided in connection with the application for a declaration of enforceability of a decision, 
authentic instrument or court settlement. 

(69) 

(70) 

In calculating the periods and time limits provided for in this Regulation, Regulation (EEC, 
Euratom)  No  1182/71  of  the  Council  of  3  June  1971  determining  the  rules  applicable  to 
periods, dates and time limits28 should apply.  

In  order  to  ensure  uniform  conditions  for  the  implementation  of  this  Regulation, 
implementing  powers  should  be  conferred  on  the  Commission  with  regard  to  the 
establishment  and  subsequent  amendment  of  the  attestations  and  forms  pertaining  to  the 
declaration  of  enforceability  of  decisions,  court  settlements  and  authentic  instruments. 
Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the 
European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  16  February  2011  laying  down  the  rules  and 
general  principles  concerning  mechanisms  for  control  by  Member  States  of  the 
Commission’s exercise of implementing powers29.  

(71)  The advisory procedure should be used for the adoption of implementing acts establishing 
and  subsequently  amending  the  attestations  and  forms  provided  for  in  this  Regulation  in 
accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 4 of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011. 

(72)  The  objectives  of  this  Regulation,  namely  the  free  movement  of  persons  in  the  European 
Union,  the  opportunity  for  spouses  to  arrange  their  property  relations  in  respect  of 
themselves and others during their life as a couple and when liquidating their property, and 
greater  predictability  and  legal  certainty,  cannot  be  sufficiently  achieved  by  the  Member 
States  but  can  rather,  by  reason  of  the  scale  and  effects  of  this  Regulation,  be  better 
achieved  at  Union  level,  where  appropriate  by  means  of  enhanced  cooperation  between 
Member States. Under the principle of subsidiarity enshrined in Article 5 of the Treaty on 
European  Union,  the  Union  has  therefore  competence  to  act.  In  accordance  with  the 
principle of proportionality set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what 
is necessary in order to achieve those objectives. 

(73)  This  Regulation  respects  fundamental  rights  and  observes  the  principles  recognised  in  the 
Charter  of  Fundamental  Rights  of  the  European  Union,  in  particular  Articles  7,  9,  17,  21 
and 47 concerning, respectively, respect for private and family life, the right to marry and to 
found  a  family  according  to  national  laws,  property  rights,  the  principle  of  non-
discrimination and the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial. This Regulation must 

27 
28 
29 

OJ L 174, 27.6.2001, p. 25. 
OJ L 124 8.6.1971, p. 1. 
OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13. 

EN 

23 

   EN 

                                                 
be  applied  by  the  courts  and  other  competent  authorities  of  the  Member  States  in 
observance of those rights and principles. 

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: 

Chapter I 
Scope and definitions  

Article 1 
Scope 

1. 

This Regulation shall apply to matrimonial property regimes.  

It shall not apply to revenue, customs or administrative matters.  

2. 

The following shall be excluded from the scope of this Regulation:  

(a) 

the legal capacity of spouses, 

(b)  

the existence, validity or recognition of a marriage, 

(c) 

maintenance obligations, 

(d) 

     the succession to the estate of a deceased spouse, 

(e) 

(f) 

(g) 

(h) 

social security 

the entitlement to transfer or adjustment between spouses in the case of divorce, 
legal  separation  or  marriage  annulment,  of  rights  to  retirement  or  disability 
pension  accrued  during  marriage  and  which  have  not  generated  pension  income 
during the marriage, 

the nature of rights in rem relating to a property, and 

any  recording  in  a  register  of  rights  in  immoveable  or  moveable  property, 
including the legal requirements for such recording, and the effects of recording 
or failing to record such rights in a register. 

Article 2 
Competence in matters of matrimonial property regimes  
within the Member States 

This Regulation shall not affect the competence of the authorities of the Member States to deal with 
matters of matrimonial property regimes.  

Article 3 
Definitions 

1. 

For the purposes of this Regulation: 

(a) 

‘matrimonial  property  regime’  means  a  set  of  rules  concerning  the  property 
relationships between the spouses and in their relations with third parties, as a result 
of marriage or its dissolution;  

EN 

24 

   EN 

 
(b) 

(c) 

(d) 

(e) 

(f) 

'matrimonial  property  agreement'  means  any  agreement  between  spouses  or  future 
spouses by which they organise their matrimonial property regime; 

'authentic  instrument'  means  a  document  in  a  matter  of  a  matrimonial  property 
regime which has been formally drawn up or registered as an authentic instrument in 
a Member State and the authenticity of which:  

(i) 

relates to the signature and the content of the authentic instrument, and 

(ii)  has been established by a public authority or other authority empowered for 

that purpose by the Member State of origin; 

'decision' means any decision in a matter of a matrimonial property regime given by 
a court of a Member State, whatever the decision may be called, including a decision 
on the determination of costs or expenses by an officer of the court; 

'court  settlement’  means  a  settlement  in  a  matter  of  matrimonial  property  regime 
which  has  been  approved  by  or  concluded  before  a  court  in  the  course  of 
proceedings; 

'Member State of origin' means the Member State in which, as the case may be, the 
decision  has  been  given,  the  authentic  instrument  drawn  up,  the  court  settlement 
approved or concluded; 

(g) 

'Member State of enforcement' means the Member State in which recognition and/or 
enforcement of the decision, authentic instrument, court settlement is requested.  

2. 

For the purposes of this Regulation, the term 'court' means any judicial authority and all 
other  authorities  and  legal  professionals  with  competence  in  matters  of  matrimonial 
property  regimes  which  exercise  judicial  functions  or  act  by  delegation  of  power  by  a 
judicial  authority  or  under  its  control,  provided  that  such  other  authorities  and  legal 
professionals offer guarantees with regard to impartiality and the right of all parties to be 
heard, and provided that their decisions under the law of the Member State in which they 
operate :  

(i) 

(ii) 

may  be  made  the  subject  of  an  appeal  to  or  review  by  a  judicial 
authority; and  

have a similar force and effect as a decision of a judicial authority on the 
same matter. 

The  Member  States  shall  notify  the  Commission  of  the  other  authorities  and  legal 
professionals referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Article 64. 

EN 

25 

   EN 

Chapter II 
Jurisdiction  

Article 4 
Jurisdiction in the event of the death of one of the spouses 

Where  a  court  of  a  Member  State  is  seised  in  matters  of  the  succession  of  a  spouse  under 
Regulation (EU) No 650/2012, the courts of that State shall have jurisdiction to rule on matters of 
the matrimonial property regime arising in connection with that succession case.  

Article 5 
Jurisdiction in cases of divorce, legal separation or marriage annulment 

1. 

2. 

Without prejudice to paragraph 2, where a court of a Member State is seised to rule on an 
application  for  divorce,  legal  separation  or  marriage  annulment  under  Regulation  (EC) 
No 2201/2003,  the  courts  of  that  State  shall  have  jurisdiction  to  rule  on  matters  of  the 
matrimonial property regime arising in connection with that application.  

Jurisdiction in matters of matrimonial property regimes under paragraph 1 shall be subject 
to  the  spouses’  agreement  where  the  court  that  is  seised  to  rule  on  the  application  for 
divorce, legal separation or marriage annulment: 

(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

(d) 

is the court of a Member State in which the applicant is habitually resident and he or 
she resided there for at least a year immediately before the application was made, in 
accordance with Article 3 (1) (a) fifth indent of Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003, or 

is the court of a Member State of which the applicant is a national and the applicant 
is  habitually  resident  there  and  resided  there  for  at  least  six  months  immediately 
before the application was made, in accordance with Article 3 (1) (a) sixth indent of 
Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003, or 

is seised under Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 in cases of conversion of 
legal separation into divorce, or  

is  seised  under  Article  7  of  Regulation  (EC)  No  2201/2003  in  cases  of  residual 
jurisdiction.  

3. 

If the agreement referred to in paragraph 2 is concluded before the court is seised to rule 
on  matters  of  matrimonial  property  regimes,  the  agreement  shall  comply  with  Article  7 
(2).  

Article 6 
Jurisdiction in other cases    

Where no court of a Member State has jurisdiction according to Articles 4 and 5 or in cases other 
than those provided for in these Articles, jurisdiction to rule on a matter of the spouses' matrimonial 
property regime shall lie with the courts of the Member State: 

(a) 

in whose territory the spouses are habitually resident at the time the court is seised, 
or failing that, 

EN 

26 

   EN 

(b) 

(c) 

in whose territory the spouses were last habitually resident, insofar as one of them 
still resides there at the time the court is seised, or failing that,  

in whose territory the respondent is habitually resident at the time the court is seised, 
or failing that, 

(d)  of the spouses' common nationality at the time the court is seised. 

Article 7 
Choice of court 

1. 

2. 

1. 

2. 

1. 

2. 

In cases covered by Article 6, the parties may agree that the courts of the Member State 
whose law is applicable in accordance with Articles 22, 26 (1) (a) or (b) or the courts of 
the  Member  State  of  the  celebration  of  the  marriage  shall  have  exclusive  jurisdiction  to 
rule on matters of their matrimonial property regime.  

The  agreement  shall  be  expressed  in  writing  and  dated  and  signed  by  the  parties.  Any 
communication  by  electronic  means  which  provides  a  durable  record  of  the  agreement 
shall be deemed equivalent to writing.  

Article 8 
Jurisdiction based on the appearance of the defendant 

Apart  from  jurisdiction  derived  from  other  provisions  of  this  Regulation,  a  court  of  a 
Member  State  whose law is applicable in accordance with Articles 22, 26 (1) (a) or (b), 
and before which a defendant enters an appearance shall have jurisdiction. This rule shall 
not apply where appearance was entered to contest the jurisdiction, or in cases covered by 
Articles 4 or 5(1). 

Before assuming jurisdiction under paragraph 1, the court shall ensure that the defendant 
is informed of his right to contest the jurisdiction and of the consequences of entering or 
not entering an appearance. 

Article 9  
Alternative jurisdiction 

By way of exception, if a court of the Member State that has jurisdiction under Articles 4, 
6,  7  or  8  holds  that  under  its  private  international  law  the  marriage  in  question  is  not 
recognised  for  the  purposes  of  matrimonial  property  regime  proceedings,  it  may  decline 
jurisdiction. If the court decides to decline, it shall do so without undue delay. 

Where a court having jurisdiction under Articles 4 or 6 declines jurisdiction and where the 
parties agree to confer jurisdiction to the courts of any other Member State in accordance 
with Article 7, jurisdiction to rule on matrimonial property regime shall lie with the courts 
of that Member State. 

In  other  cases,  jurisdiction  to  rule  on  the  matrimonial  property  regime  shall  lie  with  the 
courts of any other Member State under Articles 6, 8 or the courts of the Member State of 
the celebration of the marriage.  

EN 

27 

   EN 

 
3. 

This Article shall not apply when the parties have obtained a divorce, legal separation or 
marriage annulment which is capable of recognition in the Member State of the forum.30 

Article 10  
Subsidiary jurisdiction 

Where no court of a Member State has jurisdiction according to Articles 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 or when all 
the  courts  according  to  Article  9  have  declined  jurisdiction  and  no  court  has  jurisdiction  under 
Article 9 (2), the courts of a Member State shall have jurisdiction in so far as immoveable property 
of one or both spouses are located in the territory of that Member State, but in that event the court 
seised shall have jurisdiction to rule only in respect of the immoveable property  in question.  

Article 11  
Forum necessitatis 

Where no court of a Member State has jurisdiction pursuant to Articles 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 10, or when 
all the courts according to Article 9 have declined jurisdiction and no court of a Member State has 
jurisdiction under Articles 9 (2) and 6, the courts of a Member State may, on an exceptional basis, 
rule  on  a  matrimonial  property  regime  case  if  proceedings  cannot  reasonably  be  brought  or 
conducted or would be impossible in a third State with which the case is closely connected. 

The case must have a sufficient connection with the Member State of the court seised. 

Article 12 
Counterclaims 

The court in which proceedings are pending pursuant to Articles 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 (2), 10 or 11 shall 
also have jurisdiction to rule on a counterclaim if it falls within the scope of this Regulation. 

Article 13 
Limitation of proceedings 

1. 

2. 

Where  the  estate  of  the  deceased  whose  succession  falls  under  Regulation  (EU)  N° 
650/2012  comprises  assets  located  in  a  third  State,  the  court  seised  to  rule  on  the 
matrimonial property regime may, at the request of one of the parties, decide not to rule on 
one or more of such assets if it may be expected that its decision in respect of those assets 
will not be recognised and, where applicable, declared enforceable in that third State. 

Paragraph 1 shall  not affect  the right of the  parties  to  limit  the  scope  of  the  proceedings 
under the law of the Member State of the court seised. 

For the purpose of this Chapter, a court shall be deemed to be seised: 

Article 14  
Seising a court 

(a) 

30 

at  the  time  when  the  document  instituting  the  proceedings  or  an  equivalent  document  is 
lodged with the court, provided that the applicant has not subsequently failed to take the 
steps he was required to take to have service effected on the defendant, or 

Similar language (“capable of recognition“) can be found in Brussels I (recast) Regulation, Article 33 (1)(a) 
and (3), Article 34 (1)(b) and recital 23. 

EN 

28 

   EN 

                                                 
(b) 

(c) 

if the document has to be served before being lodged with the court, at a time when it is 
received  by  the  authority  responsible  for  service,  provided  that  the  applicant  has  not 
subsequently failed to take the steps he was required to take to have the document lodged 
with the court, or 

if the proceedings are opened of the court's own motion, at the time when the decision to 
open the proceedings is taken by the court, or, where such a decision is not required, at the 
time when the case is registered by the court. 

Article 15  
Examination as to jurisdiction 

Where a court of a Member State is seised of a matter of matrimonial property regime over which it 
has  no  jurisdiction  under  this  Regulation,  it  shall  declare  of  its  own  motion  that  it  has  no 
jurisdiction. 

1. 

2. 

3. 

1. 

2. 

Article 16 
Examination as to admissibility  

Where a defendant  habitually resident in a State  other  than  the  Member  State  where  the 
action was brought does not enter an appearance, the court having jurisdiction according 
to this Regulation shall stay the proceedings so long as it is not shown that the defendant 
has  been  able  to  receive  the  document  instituting  the  proceedings  or  an  equivalent 
document in time to arrange for his defence, or that all necessary steps have been taken to 
this end. 

Article  19  of  Regulation  (EC)  No  1393/2007  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the 
Council  of  13 November  2007  on  the  service  in  the  Member  States  of  judicial  and 
extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters31 shall apply instead of paragraph 1 
of this article if the document instituting the proceedings or an equivalent document had to 
be transmitted from one Member State to another pursuant to that Regulation. 

Where  Regulation  (EC)  No  1393/2007  is  not  applicable,  Article  15  of  the  Hague 
Convention  of  15 November  1965  on  the  service  abroad  of  judicial  and  extrajudicial 
documents  in  civil  or  commercial  matters  shall  apply  if  the  document  instituting  the 
proceedings  or  an  equivalent  document  had  to  be  transmitted  abroad  pursuant  to  that 
Convention. 

Article 17 
Lis pendens 

Where proceedings involving the same cause of action and between the parties are brought 
before courts of different Member States, any court other than the court first seised shall of 
its  own  motion  stay  its  proceedings  until  such  time  as  the  jurisdiction  of  the  court  first 
seised is established. 

In the cases referred to in paragraph 1, upon request by a court seised of the dispute, any 
other  court  seised  shall  without  delay  inform  the  former  court  of  the  date  when  it  was 
seised. 

31 

OJ L 324, 10.12.2007, p. 79. 

EN 

29 

   EN 

                                                 
3. 

1. 

2. 

3. 

If the jurisdiction of the court first seised is established, any court other than the court first 
seised shall decline jurisdiction in favour of that court. 

Article 18 
Related actions 

Where  related  actions  are  pending  in  the  courts  of  different  Member  States,  any  court 
other than the court first seised may stay its proceedings. 

Where these actions are pending at first instance, any court other than the court first seised 
may  also,  on  the  application  of  one  of  the  parties,  decline  jurisdiction  if  the  court  first 
seised  has  jurisdiction  over  the  actions  in  question  and  its  law  permits  the  consolidation 
thereof. 

For the purposes of this article, actions are deemed to be related where they are so closely 
connected  that  it  is  expedient  to  hear  and  determine  them  together  to  avoid  the  risk  of 
irreconcilable decisions resulting from separate proceedings. 

Article 19  
Provisional, including protective, measures 

Application  may  be  made  to  the  courts  of  a  Member  State  for  such  provisional,  including 
protective, measures as may be available under the law of that State, even if, under this Regulation, 
the courts of another Member State have jurisdiction as to the substance of the matter. 

Chapter III 
Applicable law  

Article 20 
Universal application 

The law designated as applicable by this Regulation shall be applied whether or not it is the law of 
a Member State. 

Article 21 
Unity of the applicable law 

The  law  applicable  to  a  matrimonial  property  regime  under  Articles  22  or  26  shall  apply  to  all 
assets falling under that regime, regardless of their location. 

Article 22 
Choice of the applicable law 

1. 

The spouses or future spouses may agree to designate, or to change, the law applicable to 
their matrimonial property regime, provided that it is one of the following:  

(a) 

(b) 

the  law  of  the  State  where  the  spouses  or  future  spouses,  or  one  of  them,  is 
habitually resident at the time the agreement is concluded, or 

the  law  of  a  State  of  nationality  of  either  spouse  or  future  spouse  at  the  time  the 
agreement is concluded. 

EN 

30 

   EN 

2. 

3. 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

1. 

2. 

1. 

2. 

Unless  the  spouses  agree  otherwise,  a  change  of  the  law  applicable  to  the  matrimonial 
property regime made during the marriage shall have prospective effect only. 

Any retroactive change of the applicable law under paragraph 2 shall not adversely affect 
the rights of third parties deriving from that law. 

Article 23 
Formal validity of the agreement on a choice of applicable law 

The agreement referred to in Article 22 shall be expressed in writing, dated and signed by 
both spouses. Any communication by electronic means which provides a durable record of 
the agreement shall be deemed equivalent to writing.  

However,  if  the  law  of  the  Member  State  in  which  both  spouses  have  their  habitual 
residence at the time the agreement is concluded lays down additional formal requirements 
for matrimonial property agreements, those requirements shall apply. 

If the spouses are habitually resident in different Member States at the time the agreement 
is  concluded  and  the  laws  of  those  States  provide  for  different  formal  requirements  for 
matrimonial property agreements, the agreement shall be formally valid if it satisfies the 
requirements of either of those laws.  

If  only  one  of  the  spouses  is  habitually  resident  in  a  Member  State  at  the  time  the 
agreement  is  concluded  and  that  State  lays  down  additional  formal  requirements  for 
matrimonial property agreements, those requirements shall apply.  

Article 24 
Consent and material validity 

The existence and validity of an agreement on choice of law or of any term thereof, shall 
be determined by the law which would govern it under Article 22 of this Regulation if the 
agreement or term were valid. 

Nevertheless, a spouse, in order to establish that he did not consent, may rely upon the law 
of the country in which he has his habitual residence at the time the court is seized if it 
appears from the circumstances that it would not be reasonable to determine the effect of 
his conduct in accordance with the law specified in paragraph 1. 

Article 25 
Formal validity of a matrimonial property agreement  

The  matrimonial  property  agreement  shall  be  expressed  in  writing,  dated  and  signed  by 
both spouses. Any communication by electronic means which provides a durable record of 
the agreement shall be deemed equivalent to writing.  

However,  if  the  law  of  the  Member  State  in  which  both  spouses  have  their  habitual 
residence at the time the agreement is concluded lays down additional formal requirements 
for matrimonial property agreements, those requirements shall apply. 

If the spouses are habitually resident in different Member States at the time the agreement 
is  concluded  and  the  laws  of  those  States  provide  for  different  formal  requirements  for 
matrimonial property agreements, the agreement shall be formally valid if it satisfies the 
requirements of either of those laws.  

EN 

31 

   EN 

 
3. 

1. 

2. 

3. 

If  only  one  of  the  spouses  is  habitually  resident  in  a  Member  State  at  the  time  the 
agreement  is  concluded  and  that  State  lays  down  additional  formal  requirements  for 
matrimonial property agreements, those requirements shall apply.  

However,  if  the  law  applicable  to  the  matrimonial  property  regime  imposes  additional 
formal requirements, those requirements shall apply. 

Article 26 
Applicable law in the absence of choice by the parties 

In the absence of a choice-of-law agreement pursuant to Article 22, the law applicable to 
the matrimonial property regime shall be the law of the State:  

(a)  of the spouses' first common habitual residence after the celebration of the marriage 

or, failing that, 

(b)  of the spouses' common nationality at the time of the celebration of the marriage or, 

failing that, 

(c)  with  which  the  spouses  jointly  have  the  closest  connection  at  the  time  of  the 

celebration of the marriage, taking into account all the circumstances.  

If the spouses have more than one common nationality at the time of the celebration of the 
marriage, only points (a) and (c) of paragraph 1 shall apply.  

By way of exception and upon application by either spouse, the judicial authority having 
jurisdiction to rule on matters of the matrimonial property regime may decide that the law 
of a State other than the State whose law is applicable under paragraph 1(a) shall govern 
the matrimonial property regime if the applicant demonstrates that: 

(a) 

the  spouses  had  their  last  common  habitual  residence  in  that  other  State  for  a 
significantly  longer  period  of  time  than  in  the  State  designated  in  paragraph  1(a); 
and 

(b)  both spouses had relied on the law of that other State in arranging or planning their 

property relations. 

The law of that other State shall apply as from the celebration of the marriage, unless one 
spouse disagrees. In the latter case, the law of that other State shall have effect as from the 
establishment of the last common habitual residence in that other State.  

The application of the law of the other State shall not adversely affect the rights of third 
parties deriving from the law applicable under paragraph 1(a). 

Paragraph  3  shall  not  apply  when  the  spouses  have  concluded  a  matrimonial  property 
agreement before the establishment of their last common habitual residence in that other 
State. 

Article 27  
Scope of the applicable law 

The law applicable to the matrimonial property regime under this Regulation shall determine, inter 
alia:  

EN 

32 

   EN 

 
 
 
(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

(d) 

(e) 

(f) 

the classification of property of either or both spouses into different categories during and 
after marriage,  

the transfer of property from one category to the other,  

the responsibility of one spouse for liabilities and debts of the other spouse,   

the powers, rights and obligations of either or both spouses with regard to property,  

the  dissolution  of  the  matrimonial  property  regime  and  the  partition,  distribution  or 
liquidation of the property,   

the  effects  of  the  matrimonial  property  regime  on  a  legal  relationship  between  a  spouse 
and third parties, and 

(g) 

the material validity of a matrimonial property agreement. 

Article 28 
Effects in respect of third parties 

1. 

Notwithstanding  Article  27  (f),  the  law  that  governs  the  matrimonial  property  regime 
between  the  spouses  may  not  be  invoked  by  a  spouse  against  a  third  party  in  a  dispute 
between the third party and either or both of the spouses unless the third party knew or, in 
the exercise of due diligence, should have known of that law.  

2. 

The third party is deemed to possess this knowledge, if 

(a) 

the law that governs the matrimonial property regime is the law of 

(i) 

the State whose law is applicable  to the transaction between a spouse and 
the third party,  

(ii) 

the  State  where  the  contracting  spouse  and  the  third  party  have  their 
habitual residence, or,  

(iii) 

in cases involving immoveable property, the State in which the property is 
situated, 

or  

(b) 

either  spouse  had  complied  with  the  applicable  requirements  for  disclosure  or 
registration of the matrimonial property regime specified by the law of: 

(i) 

the State whose law is applicable  to the transaction between a spouse and 
the third party,  

(ii) 

the  State  where  the  contracting  spouse  and  the  third  party  have  their 
habitual residence or 

(iii) 

in cases involving immoveable property, the State in which the property is 
situated. 

EN 

33 

   EN 

3. 

Where the law that governs the matrimonial property regime between the spouses cannot 
be  invoked  by  a  spouse  against  a  third  party  by  virtue  of  paragraph  1,  the  effects  of  the 
matrimonial property regime in respect of the third party will be governed: 

(a) 

(b) 

by  the  law  of  the  State  whose  law  is  applicable  to  the  transaction  between  a 
spouse and the third party; or 

in cases involving immoveable property or registered assets or rights, by the law 
of the State in which the property is situated or in which the assets or rights are 
registered. 

Article 29  
Adaptation of rights in rem 

Where  a  person  invokes  a  right  in  rem  to  which  he  is  entitled  under  the  law  applicable  to  the 
matrimonial property regime and the law of the Member State in which the right is invoked does 
not know the right in rem in question, that right shall, if necessary and to the extent possible, be 
adapted to the closest equivalent right under the law of that State, taking into account the aims and 
the interests pursued by the specific right in rem and the effects attached to it. 

Article 30 
Overriding mandatory provisions 

1. 

2. 

Nothing  in  this  Regulation  shall  restrict  the  application  of  the  overriding  mandatory 
provisions of the law of the forum.  

Overriding  mandatory  provisions  are  provisions  the  respect  for  which  is  regarded  as 
crucial by a Member State for safeguarding its public interests, such as its political, social 
or economic organisation, to such an extent that they are applicable to any situation falling 
within their scope, irrespective of the law otherwise applicable to the matrimonial property 
regime under this Regulation. 

Article 31 
Public policy  

The application of a provision of the law of any State designated by this Regulation may be refused 
only if such application is manifestly incompatible with the public policy of the forum. 

Article 32 
Exclusion of renvoi 

The application of the law of any State specified by this Regulation means the application of the 
rules of law in force in that State other than its rules of private international law. 

Article 33 
States with more than one legal system - territorial conflicts of laws 

1. 

Where  the  law  specified  by  this  Regulation  is  that  of  a  State  which  comprises  several 
territorial units each of which has its own rules of law in respect of matrimonial property 
regimes,  the  internal  conflict  of  laws  rules  of  that  State  shall  determine  the  relevant 
territorial unit whose rules of law shall apply. 

2. 

In the absence of such internal conflict of laws rules: 

EN 

34 

   EN 

(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

any reference to the law of the State referred to in paragraph 1 shall, for the purposes 
of  determining  the  law  applicable  pursuant  to  provisions  referring  to  the  habitual 
residence of the spouses, be construed as referring to the law of the territorial unit in 
which the spouses have their habitual residence; 

any reference to the law of the State referred to in paragraph 1 shall, for the purposes 
of determining the law applicable pursuant to provisions referring to the nationality 
of the spouses, be construed as referring to the law of the territorial unit with which 
the spouses have the closest connection; 

any reference to the law of the State referred to in paragraph 1 shall, for the purposes 
of determining the law applicable pursuant to any other provisions referring to other 
elements as connecting factors, be construed as referring to the law of the territorial 
unit in which the relevant element is located. 

Article 34 
States with more than one legal system - inter-personal conflicts of laws 

In relation to a State which has two or more systems of law or sets of rules applicable to different 
categories of persons in respect of matrimonial property regimes, any reference to the law of such a 
State shall be construed as referring to the system of law or set of rules determined by the rules in 
force in that State. In the absence of such rules, the system of law or the set of rules with which the 
spouses have the closest connection shall apply.  

Article 35 
Non-application of this Regulation to internal conflicts of laws 

A Member State which comprises several territorial units each of which has its own rules of law in 
respect of matrimonial property regimes shall not be required to apply this Regulation to conflicts 
of laws arising between such units only. 

Chapter IV 
Recognition, enforceability and enforcement of decisions 

Article 36 
Recognition 

1. 

2. 

3. 

A  decision  given  in  a  Member  State  shall  be  recognised  in  the  other  Member  States 
without any special procedure being required.  

Any  interested  party  who  raises  the  recognition  of  a  decision  as  the  principal  issue  in  a 
dispute may, in accordance with the procedures provided for in Articles 44 to 57, apply for 
the decision to be recognised. 

If  the  outcome  of  the  proceedings  in  a  court  of  a  Member  State  depends  on  the 
determination  of  an  incidental  question  of  recognition,  that  court  shall  have  jurisdiction 
over that question. 

EN 

35 

   EN 

 
Article 37 
Grounds of non-recognition 

A decision shall not be recognised: 

(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

(d) 

if  such  recognition  is  manifestly  contrary  to  public  policy  (ordre  public)  in  the  Member 
State in which recognition is sought; 

where  it  was  given  in  default  of  appearance,  if  the  defendant  was  not  served  with  the 
document  which  instituted  the  proceedings  or  with  an  equivalent  document  in  sufficient 
time and in such a way as to enable him to arrange for his defence, unless the defendant 
failed to commence proceedings to challenge the decision when it was possible for him to 
do so; 

it  is  irreconcilable  with  a  decision  given  in  proceedings  between  the  same  parties  in  the 
Member State in which recognition is sought; 

it  is  irreconcilable  with  an  earlier  decision  given  in  another  Member  State  or  in  a  third 
State involving the same cause of action and between the same parties, provided that the 
earlier decision fulfils the conditions necessary for its recognition in the Member State in 
which recognition is sought. 

Article 38 
Fundamental rights 

Article 36 shall be applied by the courts and other competent authorities of the Member States in 
observance  of  the  fundamental  rights  and  principles  recognised  in  the  Charter  of  Fundamental 
Rights  of  the  European  Union,  in  particular  Article  21  thereof  on  the  principle  of  non-
discrimination. 

Article 39 
Prohibition of review of jurisdiction of the court of origin 

1. 

2. 

The jurisdiction of the court of the Member State of origin may not be reviewed.  

The public policy (ordre public) criterion referred to in Article 37 shall not apply to the 
rules on jurisdiction set out in Articles 4 to 11. 

Article 40 
No review as to substance 

Under no circumstances may a decision given in a Member State be reviewed as to its substance. 

Article 41 
Staying of recognition proceedings 

A court of a Member State in which recognition is sought of a decision given in another Member 
State  may  stay  the  proceedings  if  an  ordinary  appeal  against  the  decision  has  been  lodged  in  the 
Member State of origin. 

EN 

36 

   EN 

Article 42 
Enforceability  

Decisions  given  in  a  Member  State  and  enforceable  in  that  State  shall  be  enforceable  in  another 
Member  State  when,  on  the  application  of  any  interested  party,  they  have  been  declared 
enforceable there in accordance with the procedure provided for in Articles 44 to 57. 

Article 43 
Determination of domicile  

To determine whether, for the purposes of the procedure provided for in Articles 44 to 57, a party is 
domiciled in the Member State of enforcement, the court seised shall apply the internal law of that 
Member State. 

Article 44 
Jurisdiction of local courts 

1. 

2. 

1. 

2. 

3. 

1. 

2. 

The  application  for  a  declaration  of  enforceability  shall  be  submitted  to  the  court  or 
competent  authority  of  the  Member  State  of  enforcement  communicated  to  the 
Commission in accordance with Article 64.  

The local jurisdiction shall be determined by reference to the place of domicile of the party 
against whom enforcement is sought, or to the place of enforcement. 

Article 45 
Procedure 

The  application  procedure  shall  be  governed  by  the  law  of  the  Member  State 
of enforcement. 

The applicant shall not be required to have a postal address or an authorised representative 
in the Member State of enforcement. 

The application shall be accompanied by the following documents: 

(a) 

(b) 

a  copy  of  the  decision  which  satisfies  the  conditions  necessary  to  establish 
its authenticity; 

the  attestation  issued  by  the  court  or  competent  authority  of  the  Member  State  of 
origin using the form established in accordance with the advisory procedure referred 
to in Article 67 (2), without prejudice to Article 46. 

Article 46 
Non-production of the attestation 

If  the  attestation  referred  to  in  point (b)  of  Article 45  (3)  is  not  produced,  the  court  or 
competent  authority  may  specify  a  time  for  its  production  or  accept  an  equivalent 
document  or,  if  it  considers  that  it  has  sufficient  information  before  it,  dispense  with 
its production. 

If  the  court  or  competent  authority  so  requires,  a  translation  or  transliteration  of  the 
documents  shall  be  produced.  The  translation  shall  be  done  by  a  person  qualified  to  do 
translations in one of the Member States. 

EN 

37 

   EN 

Article 47 
Declaration of enforceability 

The  decision  shall  be  declared  enforceable  immediately  on  completion  of  the  formalities  in 
Article 45  without  any  review  under  Article 37.  The  party  against  whom  enforcement  is  sought 
shall not at this stage of the proceedings be entitled to make any submissions on the application. 

1. 

2. 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

Article 48 
Notice of the decision on the application for a declaration of enforceability 

The  decision  on  the  application  for  a  declaration  of  enforceability  shall  forthwith  be 
brought to the notice of the applicant in accordance with the procedure laid down by the 
law of the Member State of enforcement. 

The declaration of enforceability shall be served on the party against whom enforcement is 
sought, accompanied by the decision, if not already served on that party. 

Article 49 
Appeal against the decision on the application for a declaration of enforceability 

The  decision  on  the  application  for  a  declaration  of  enforceability  may  be  appealed  by 
either party. 

The appeal shall be lodged with the court communicated by the Member State concerned 
to the Commission in accordance with Article 64. 

The  appeal  shall  be  dealt  with  in  accordance  with  the  rules  governing  procedure  in 
contradictory matters. 

If the party against whom enforcement is sought fails to appear before the appellate court 
in proceedings concerning an appeal brought by the applicant, Article 16 shall apply even 
where  the  party  against  whom  enforcement  is  sought  is  not  domiciled  in  any  of  the 
Member States. 

An  appeal  against  the  declaration  of  enforceability  shall  be  lodged  within  30  days  of 
service  thereof.  If  the  party  against  whom  enforcement  is  sought  is  domiciled  in  a 
Member State  other  than  that  in  which  the  declaration  of  enforceability  was  given,  the 
time for appealing shall be 60 days and shall run from the date of service, either on him in 
person or at his residence. No extension may be granted on account of distance. 

Article 50 
Procedure to contest the decision given on appeal 

The  decision  given  on  the  appeal  may  be  contested  only  by  the  procedure  communicated  by  the 
Member State concerned to the Commission in accordance with Article 64. 

Article 51 
Refusal or revocation of a declaration of enforceability 

The  court  with  which  an  appeal  is  lodged  under  Article 49  or  Article 50  shall  refuse  or  revoke  a 
declaration  of  enforceability  only  on  one  of  the  grounds  specified  in  Article 37.  It  shall  give  its 
decision without delay. 

EN 

38 

   EN 

Article 52 
Staying of proceedings 

The court with which an appeal is lodged under Article 49 or Article 50 shall, on the application of 
the  party  against  whom  enforcement  is  sought,  stay  the  proceedings  if  the  enforceability  of  the 
decision is suspended in the Member State of origin by reason of an appeal. 

1. 

2. 

3. 

1. 

Article 53 
Provisional, including protective, measures 

When  a  decision  must  be  recognised  in  accordance  with  this  Chapter,  nothing  shall 
prevent the applicant from availing himself of provisional, including protective, measures 
in accordance with the law of the Member State of enforcement without a declaration of 
enforceability under Article 46 being required.  

The  declaration  of  enforceability  shall  carry  with  it  by  operation  of  law  the  power  to 
proceed to any protective measures. 

During the time specified for an appeal pursuant to Article 49(5) against the declaration of 
enforceability and until any such appeal has been determined, no measures of enforcement 
may  be  taken  other  than  protective  measures  against  the  property  of  the  party  against 
whom enforcement is sought. 

Article 54 
Partial enforceability 

Where  a  decision  has  been  given  in  respect  of  several  matters  and  the  declaration  of 
enforceability cannot be given for all of them, the court or competent authority shall give 
it for one or more of them. 

2. 

An applicant may request a declaration of enforceability limited to parts of a decision. 

Article 55 
Legal aid 

An applicant who, in the Member State of origin, has benefited from complete or partial legal aid 
or  exemption  from  costs  or  expenses  shall  be  entitled,  in  any  proceedings  for  a  declaration  of 
enforceability, to benefit from the most favourable legal aid or the most extensive exemption from 
costs or expenses provided for by the law of the Member State of enforcement. 

Article 56 
No security, bond or deposit 

No  security,  bond  or  deposit,  however  described,  shall  be  required  of  a  party  who  in  one 
Member State applies for recognition, enforceability or enforcement of a decision given in another 
Member State on the ground that he is a foreign national or that he is not domiciled or resident in 
the Member State of enforcement. 

Article 57 
No charge, duty or fee 

In proceedings for the issue of a declaration of enforceability, no charge, duty or fee calculated by 
reference to the value of the matter at issue may be levied in the Member State of enforcement. 

EN 

39 

   EN 

Chapter V 
Authentic instruments and court settlements 

Article 58 
Acceptance of authentic instruments 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

1. 

2. 

3. 

An  authentic  instrument  established  in  a  Member  State  shall  have  the  same  evidentiary 
effects  in  another  Member  State  as  it  has  in  the  Member  State  of  origin,  or  the  most 
comparable  effects,  provided  that  this  is  not  manifestly  contrary  to  public  policy  (ordre 
public) in the Member State concerned. 

  A  person  wishing  to  use  an  authentic  instrument  in  another  Member  State  may  ask  the 
authority establishing the authentic instrument in the Member State of origin to fill in the 
form  established  in  accordance  with  the  advisory  procedure  referred  to  in  Article 67(2) 
describing  the  evidentiary  effects  which  the  authentic  instrument  produces  in  the 
Member State of origin. 

Any challenge relating to the authenticity of an authentic instrument shall be made before 
the courts of the Member State of origin and shall be decided upon under the law of that 
State.  The  authentic  instrument  challenged  shall  not  produce  any  evidentiary  effect  in 
another Member State as long as the challenge is pending before the competent court. 

Any  challenge  relating  to  the  legal  acts  or  legal  relationships  recorded  in  an  authentic 
instrument shall be made before the courts having jurisdiction under this Regulation and 
shall  be  decided  upon  under  the  law  applicable  pursuant  to  Chapter III.  The  authentic 
instrument  challenged  shall  not  produce  any  evidentiary  effect  in  a  Member  State  other 
than  the  Member  State  of  origin  as  regards  the  matter  being  challenged  as  long  as  the 
challenge is pending before the competent court. 

If the outcome of proceedings in a court of a Member State depends on the determination 
of  an  incidental  question  relating  to  the  legal  acts  or  legal  relationships  recorded  in  an 
authentic  instrument  in  matters  of  matrimonial  property  regimes,  that  court  shall  have 
jurisdiction over that question. 

Article 59 
Enforceability of authentic instruments 

An  authentic  instrument  which  is  enforceable  in  the  Member  State  of  origin  shall  be 
declared enforceable in another Member State on the application of any interested party in 
accordance with the procedure provided for in Articles 44 to 57. 

For  the  purposes  of  point (b)  of  Article 45  (3),  the  authority  which  established  the 
authentic instrument shall, on the application of any interested party, issue an attestation 
using  the  form  established  in  accordance  with  the  advisory  procedure  referred  to  in 
Article 67 (2). 

The  court  with  which  an  appeal  is  lodged  under  Article  49  or  Article 50  shall  refuse  or 
revoke  a  declaration  of  enforceability  only  if  enforcement  of  the  authentic  instrument  is 
manifestly contrary to public policy (ordre public) in the Member State of enforcement. 

EN 

40 

   EN 

Article 60 
Enforceability of court settlements 

1. 

2. 

3. 

Court settlements which are enforceable in the Member State of origin shall be declared 
enforceable  in  another  Member  State  on  the  application  of  any  interested  party  in 
accordance with the procedure provided for in Articles 44 to 57. 

For the purposes of point (b) of Article 45 (3), the court which approved the settlement or 
before  which  it  was  concluded  shall,  on  the  application  of  any  interested  party,  issue  an 
attestation using the form established in accordance with the advisory procedure referred 
to in Article 67 (2). 

The  court  with  which  an  appeal  is  lodged  under  Article 49  or  Article 50  shall  refuse  or 
revoke  a  declaration  of  enforceability  only  if  enforcement  of  the  court  settlement  is 
manifestly contrary to public policy (ordre public) in the Member State of enforcement. 

Chapter VI 
General and final provisions 

Article 61 
Legalisation and other similar formalities 

No  legalisation  or  other  similar  formality  shall  be  required  in  respect  of  documents  issued  in  a 
Member State in the context of this Regulation.  

Article 62 
Relations with existing international conventions 

1. 

2. 

3. 

This Regulation shall not affect the application of the bilateral or multilateral conventions 
to which one or more Member States are party at the time of adoption of this Regulation 
and  which  concern  matters  covered  by  this  Regulation,  without  prejudice  to  the 
obligations of the Member States under Article 351 of the Treaty. 

Notwithstanding  paragraph  1,  this  Regulation  shall,  between  Member  States,  take 
precedence over conventions which relate to subjects governed by this Regulation and to 
which the Member States are party. 

This Regulation shall not preclude the application of the Convention of 6 February 1931 
between Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden containing international private 
law  provisions  on  marriage,  adoption  and  guardianship,  as  revised  in  2006;  of  the 
Convention  of  19  November  1934  between  Denmark,  Finland,  Iceland,  Norway  and 
Sweden  comprising  private  international  law  provisions  on  succession,  wills  and  estate 
administration,  as  revised  in  June  2012;  and  of  the  Convention  of  11  October  1977 
between  Denmark,  Finland,  Iceland,  Norway  and  Sweden  on  the  recognition  and 
enforcement  of  judgements  in  civil  matters,  by  the  Member  States  which  are  parties 
thereto, in so far as they provide for simplified and more expeditious procedures for the 
recognition and enforcement of decisions in matters of matrimonial property regime. 

Article 63 
Information made available to the public 

The Member States shall, with a view to making the information available to the public within the 
framework  of  the  European  Judicial  Network  in  civil  and  commercial  matters,  provide  the 

EN 

41 

   EN 

Commission  with  a  short  summary  of  their  national  legislation  and  procedures  relating  to 
matrimonial  property  regimes,  including  information  on  the  type  of  authority  which  has 
competence in matters of matrimonial property regimes and on the effects in respect of third parties 
referred to in Article 28. 

The Member States shall keep the information permanently updated. 

Article 64 
Information on contact details and procedures 

1. 

By …*, the Member States shall communicate to the Commission: 

(a) 

the courts or authorities with competence to deal with applications for a declaration 
of enforceability in accordance with Article 44(1) and with appeals against decisions 
on such applications in accordance with Article 49(2); 

(b) 

the procedures to contest the decision given on appeal referred to in Article 50. 

The  Member  States  shall  apprise  the  Commission  of  any  subsequent  changes  to 
that information. 

The  Commission  shall  publish  the  information  communicated  in  accordance  with 
paragraph 1  in  the  Official  Journal  of  the  European  Union,  with  the  exception  of  the 
addresses and other contact details of the courts and authorities referred to in point (a) of 
paragraph 1. 

The Commission shall make all information communicated in accordance with paragraph 
1  publicly  available  through  any  appropriate  means,  in  particular  through  the  European 
Judicial Network in civil and commercial matters.  

Article 65 
Establishment and subsequent amendment of the list containing the information  
referred to in Article 3(2) 

The  Commission  shall,  on  the  basis  of  the  notifications  by  the  Member  States,  establish 
the list of the other authorities and legal professionals referred to in Article 3(2).  

The  Member  States  shall  notify  the  Commission  of  any  subsequent  changes  to  the 
information contained in that list. The Commission shall amend the list accordingly.  

The  Commission  shall  publish  the  list  and  any  subsequent  amendments  in  the  Official 
Journal of the European Union.  

The Commission shall make all information notified in accordance with paragraphs 1 and 
2  publicly  available  through  any  other  appropriate  means,  in  particular  through  the 
European Judicial Network in civil and commercial matters.  

2. 

3. 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

* 

OJ: please insert the date: 9 months before the date of application of this Regulation. 

EN 

42 

   EN 

                                                 
Article 66 
Establishment and subsequent amendment of the attestations and forms referred to in 
Articles 45 (3)(b), 58, 59 and 60 

The  Commission  shall  adopt  implementing  acts  establishing  and  subsequently  amending  the 
attestations and forms referred to in Articles 45(3)(b), 58, 59 and 60. Those implementing acts shall 
be adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 67(2).  

Article 67 
Committee procedure 

The Commission shall be assisted by a committee. That committee shall be a committee 
within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011. 

Where  reference  is  made  to  this  paragraph,  Article 4  of  Regulation  (EU)  No 182/2011 
shall apply. 

Article 68 
Review clause 

No later than eight years after the date of application, the Commission shall present to the 
European  Parliament,  the  Council  and  the  European  Economic  and  Social  Committee  a 
report  on  the  application  of  this  Regulation.  Where  necessary,  the  report  shall  be 
accompanied by proposals to amend this Regulation. 

No later than five years after the date of application, the Commission shall present to the 
European  Parliament,  the  Council  and  the  European  Economic  and  Social  Committee  a 
report on the application of Articles 9 and 38 of this Regulation. This report shall evaluate 
in particular the extent to which these articles have ensured access to justice. 

To that end, Member States shall communicate to the Commission relevant information on 
the application of this Regulation by their courts. 

Article 69 
Transitional provisions 

This Regulation shall apply only to legal proceedings instituted, to authentic instruments 
formally drawn up or registered and to court settlements approved or concluded on or after 
the date of its application subject to paragraphs 2 and 3. 

However, if the proceedings in the Member State of origin were instituted before the date 
of  application  of  this  Regulation,  decisions  given  after  that  date  shall  be  recognised  and 
enforced in accordance with Chapter IV as long as the rules of jurisdiction applied comply 
with those set out in Chapter II.  

Chapter III shall apply only to spouses who marry or who specify the law applicable to the 
matrimonial property regime after the date of application of this Regulation.  

Article 70 
Entry into force 

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication 
in the Official Journal of the European Union. 

1. 

2. 

1. 

2. 

3. 

1. 

2. 

3. 

1. 

EN 

43 

   EN 

2. 

This  Regulation  shall  apply  from  …32,  except  for  Articles  63  and  64  which  shall  apply 
from …33, and Articles 65, 66 and 67, which shall apply from …34.  

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in the participating Member 
States in accordance with the Treaties. 

Done at Brussels, 
For the Council 

The President 

32 
33 
34 

Two years and a half after its entry into force.  
Nine months before the date of application 
The day following the date of entry into force of this Regulation.  

EN 

44 

   EN